Slashdot Mirror


2004 MN4 Asteroid Odds Inching Up Again

bfwebster writes "The latest update from NASA now gives 2004 MN4 a 1-in-37 chance (probability of 2.7%) of hitting Earth on April 13, 2029. That's a bump up from the 1-in-46 (2.2%) odds given this weekend and almost a 10x increase in probability from the original 1-in-300 odds announced late last week. Interesting times, indeed."

697 comments

  1. Space Soap Opera by daniil · · Score: 5, Funny

    Ladies and gentlemen, may i present the new Slashdot soap opera: Asteroid 2004 MN4!!! That's right -- we have ourselves a new SCO! Watch out, for soon, it'll be demanding $699 license fees from all of you!

    --
    Man is a slave because freedom is difficult, whereas slavery is easy.
    1. Re:Space Soap Opera by tambo · · Score: 3, Funny
      Ladies and gentlemen, may i present the new Slashdot soap opera: Asteroid 2004 MN4!!!

      ...with the requisite theme song of course:

      That's great, it starts with an earthquake, birds and snakes, an aeroplane - Lenny Bruce is not afraid. Eye of a hurricane, listen to yourself churn - world serves its own needs, don't misserve your own needs. Feed it up a knock, speed, grunt no, strength no. Ladder structure clatter with fear of height, down height. Wire in a fire, represent the seven games in a government for hire and a combat site. Left her, wasn't coming in a hurry with the furies breathing down your neck. Team by team reporters baffled, trump, tethered crop. Look at that low plane! Fine then. Uh oh, overflow, population, common group, but it'll do. Save yourself, serve yourself. World serves its own needs, listen to your heart bleed. Tell me with the rapture and the reverent in the right - right. You vitriolic, patriotic, slam, fight, bright light, feeling pretty psyched.

      It's the end of the world as we know it.
      It's the end of the world as we know it.
      It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine.

      Six o'clock - TV hour. Don't get caught in foreign tower. Slash and burn, return, listen to yourself churn. Lock him in uniform and book burning, blood letting. Every motive escalate. Automotive incinerate. Light a candle, light a motive. Step down, step down. Watch a heel crush, crush. Uh oh, this means no fear - cavalier. Renegade and steer clear! A tournament, a tournament, a tournament of lies. Offer me solutions, offer me alternatives and I decline.

      It's the end of the world as we know it.
      It's the end of the world as we know it.
      It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine.

      The other night I tripped a nice continental drift divide. Mount St. Edelite. Leonard Bernstein. Leonid Breshnev, Lenny Bruce and Lester Bangs. Birthday party, cheesecake, jelly bean, boom! You symbiotic, patriotic, slam, but neck, right? Right.

      It's the end of the world as we know it.
      It's the end of the world as we know it.
      It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine...fine...

      (It's time I had some time alone)

      --
      Computer over. Virus = very yes.
    2. Re:Space Soap Opera by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      c'mon? Can't say we didn't see this coming Red Sox win world series George Bush reelected Tsunamis killing 10s of thousands If these ain't signs of the apocalypse coming, then heck if I could tell ya what are.

    3. Re:Space Soap Opera by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ugh. Just link to the lyrics please.

    4. Re:Space Soap Opera by daniil · · Score: 2, Funny
      If these ain't signs of the apocalypse coming, then heck if I could tell ya what are.

      I can't remember the rest (it's been a while since i last read The Lesser Known Signs of the Apocalypse), but i think number three was A Rain of Poorly Designed Kittens.

      --
      Man is a slave because freedom is difficult, whereas slavery is easy.
    5. Re:Space Soap Opera by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      The asteroid needs it own icon. Now.

    6. Re:Space Soap Opera by slam+smith · · Score: 2, Funny

      Nah, after this baby slams into the earth, the only currency that will be worth anything at all are cans of baked beans.

    7. Re:Space Soap Opera by pclminion · · Score: 4, Insightful
      This is funny, but it also raises an important point that many people seem to miss.

      Last time I took part in a discussion about asteroid impacts, it was suggested that people who are rich enough would be able to simply buy their way off the planet before the disaster strikes. As in buy with money.

      Think about it. There's a gigantic rock hurtling toward Earth. There are only enough spaceships (let's say) to take 1,000 people off the surface. All life as we know it on Earth is about to be destroyed. Do you: A) Get on your spaceship and get the hell out of there, or B) Accept pieces of paper with dead presidents printed on them in return for allowing other people to get off the planet?

      Even if you survived the ensuing destruction, what good would those little pieces of paper be?

      The rich sometimes seem to think they can buy their way out of any problem, but the total destruction of Earth isn't something that money will save you from.

    8. Re:Space Soap Opera by the_mad_poster · · Score: 1
      --
      Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
    9. Re:Space Soap Opera by ATMAvatar · · Score: 1

      ...and twinkies.

      --
      "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
    10. Re:Space Soap Opera by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, since those pieces of paper with dead presidents printed on them are no longer backed by anything in particular, the only way they're worth anything now is by consensus. How much good they'd be after the big rock hits would depend on whether or not the survivors decided to agree that they're still worth something. And the habit of agreeing that they're worth something is pretty well ingrained.

      Almost certainly, it would depend on whether the governments that printed the little pieces of paper survived the disaster. Which they probably would, for the simple reason that governments are very, very good at ensuring their own survival.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    11. Re:Space Soap Opera by daniil · · Score: 1
      Aww.

      On the outside, the design looks just flawless. A perfectly adorable little abomination. But who knows, what it might be hiding in its cute little tummy...

      --
      Man is a slave because freedom is difficult, whereas slavery is easy.
    12. Re:Space Soap Opera by nizo · · Score: 2, Funny

      What is the international symbol for "Start looting now"?

    13. Re:Space Soap Opera by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lololol, oh thats funny.

    14. Re:Space Soap Opera by pclminion · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Except that if Earth's surface was completely destroyed, there would be nothing for us to purchase with our precious money, whether we believe it to have value or not.

    15. Re:Space Soap Opera by slam+smith · · Score: 1

      You do have a good point. Paper currency is often referred as fiat money. The currency of the US is backed up by the "full faith and credit" of the US gov't. But it is also backed up by "guns and bullets" of the US gov't. Take both away and what you have left is very uncomfortable toilet paper. (Anymore it isn't even entirely paper, just bits on my banks database.)

    16. Re:Space Soap Opera by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, yeah, if you're talking about a planet-killer, that's different -- I suspect that in the months before impact, we'd see a period of hyperinflation followed by economic and political breakdown, leading eventually to anarchy. (Me, I'm for hiding away with a few good friends and a bunch of booze.) Whether the rich people could get off the planet -- assuming, of course, that the technological capacity existed; it certainly doesn't now -- would probably depend on how many guns they had stockpiled. But I was thinking more something like a Chicxulub, which would certainly kill a hell of a lot of people, but probably wouldn't mean the end of the human race, and maybe not even civilization, after a fashion.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    17. Re:Space Soap Opera by rabuksak · · Score: 1

      why not have them simply pay far in advance? we seem to know there is a 1/37 chance of the rock hitting earth in 2029 (25 years in advance people). im sure come 2015 or 2020, we'll know more accurately the chance of impact. if that chance is high, i think i could manage good use of oodles of cash for the next 10 to 15 years of my life, couldnt you?

    18. Re:Space Soap Opera by AstroDrabb · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I think this or this should work ; P

      --
      If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
      it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
    19. Re:Space Soap Opera by Surt · · Score: 1

      Historically, governments are actually quite poor at ensuring their survival. Of all the governments that have ever been, less than 1% have survived even 500 years.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    20. Re:Space Soap Opera by Metasquares · · Score: 2, Informative

      This particular asteroid is not big enough to cause problems on a global scale. On the other hand, it could probably destroy a large city or create a tsunami, so it isn't something to shrug off either.

    21. Re:Space Soap Opera by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and for God's sake do them the favor of giving them credit.

    22. Re:Space Soap Opera by TheGavster · · Score: 1

      I'd take a picture of the sign ... but some hooligan snatched it.

      --
      "Because Science" is one step from "Because old book". Try "Because of my experiment testing my falsifiable assertion".
    23. Re:Space Soap Opera by Fishstick · · Score: 1

      hmmm, wasn't there a story about how the value of iraq's pre-war (Saddam) currency was holding or even increasing after the war even though there was no Saddam regime backing the money anymore?

      I've googled a couple minutes and can't find it though...

      --

      There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
      Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.

    24. Re:Space Soap Opera by AxelBoldt · · Score: 1
      im sure come 2015 or 2020, we'll know more accurately the chance of impact. if that chance is high, i think i could manage good use of oodles of cash for the next 10 to 15 years of my life, couldnt you?

      As you get closer and closer to a certain and all-ending catastrophe, you obviously get hyperinflation. The last night before the collision, you won't be able to pay for drugs or a prostitute anymore.

    25. Re:Space Soap Opera by AxelBoldt · · Score: 1
      As in buy with money.

      The only currencies worth anything close to a certain all-ending catastrophe are things that some people can convert into immediate ecstasy, so probably mainly drugs and slave girls.

    26. Re:Space Soap Opera by LMariachi · · Score: 1

      "Mt. St. Edelite?" You sure it isn't "mountains stayin' in a line?" This is the problem with lyrics sites -- one person does a transcription and they all just copy it from each other, propagating mondegreens.

    27. Re:Space Soap Opera by b-baggins · · Score: 1

      OK. Most rich people aren't rich because they're stupid. They wouldn't pay you in money, they'd pay you in commodities that would increase your chances of survival. They'd pay you in weapons, and ammo and durable food stocks and fuel and housing.

      Heck, come to think of it, the rich would probably just buy those things for themselves since the odds of survival after the strike with a fortress on the Canadian Sheild is probably better than taking off in a spaceship.

      --
      You can tell a great deal about the character of a man by observing those who hate him.
    28. Re:Space Soap Opera by c0p0n · · Score: 1

      I, for one, welcome our new Stone Overlors


      just in case...

      --

      Your head a splode
    29. Re:Space Soap Opera by rossdee · · Score: 1

      "Paper currency is often referred as fiat money."

      You should be able to buy italian cars with it then...

    30. Re:Space Soap Opera by lachlan76 · · Score: 1

      Unless the asteroid hits the fortress...then you'd be fucked ;)

    31. Re:Space Soap Opera by Moofie · · Score: 1

      What exactly is your aversion to a twin of a dead cat? I really don't understand.

      I mean, I think the lady is NUTS to spend $50 large on a freakin' CAT, but there's nothing wrong with the cat...

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    32. Re:Space Soap Opera by MShield · · Score: 1

      You symbiotic patriotic slam, but neck, right? Right. oooor... You symbiotic patriotic slam the net, right? Right.

    33. Re:Space Soap Opera by daniil · · Score: 1

      Call me paranoid, but i have always suspected that ALL cats have something to hide. For one, their behaviour (why are they all acting so friendly towards me?) seems awfully suspicious...

      --
      Man is a slave because freedom is difficult, whereas slavery is easy.
  2. Early impact? by LNO · · Score: 1

    Nothing for you to see here. Please move along.

    What, the asteroid already hit the servers?

    1. Re:Early impact? by JaffaKREE · · Score: 2, Funny

      People, please stop slashdotting Nasa. It makes them look even worse. Deadly asteroids, THEN server explosions ?

  3. The odds are now at 100% by waynegoode · · Score: 5, Funny
    The odds of it hitting Earth are now at 100%.

    Or, if you prefer, they are now at 1 in 1,000,000.

    This edition of Fun With URLs has been brought to you courtesy of an overly trusting NASA webmaster.

    1. Re:The odds are now at 100% by glomph · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yeah, Ron the Webmaster is overly trusting, he has his email address directly linked on that 'probability' page. Guess he was trying for maximum impact....

    2. Re:The odds are now at 100% by beatdown · · Score: 1, Funny

      It gets even worse

    3. Re:The odds are now at 100% by Xcruciate · · Score: 1

      Actually, the odds are 50%. It either hits us or misses us...

      --
      It's like "looking busy" at your employment - it's actually easier to do real work than to fake it. - bmo
    4. Re:The odds are now at 100% by LordNimon · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Geez, talk about bad math. I think what you were trying to say is that the odds are either 100% or 0%, and using probability to determine whether a single event will occur is just mental masturbation for physicists.

      --
      And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
      To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
    5. Re:The odds are now at 100% by NitsujTPU · · Score: 1

      Did anybody else notice that theres a very small chance that it will neither hit nor miss Earth?

      ===

      Impact Probability: .99

      99.000000000% chance of Earth impact

      or

      1 in 1.0 chance

      or

      0.99999999% chance the asteroid will miss the Earth

    6. Re:The odds are now at 100% by gagge · · Score: 1

      That's what he said, 50%, it's either 100% or 0%.

    7. Re:The odds are now at 100% by CmdrGravy · · Score: 1

      Well maybe it will hit something else.

    8. Re:The odds are now at 100% by AxelBoldt · · Score: 1

      It's perfectly possible to consistently and meaningfully assign probabilities to one-time events, such as "the asteroid will hit us". You just can't use the long-term-relative-frequency definition of probability; instead you use the rational-degree-of-belief definition of probability, based on the odds a rational bettor would accept.

    9. Re:The odds are now at 100% by LordNimon · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      That's not what 50% means. You're also bad at math. That's the whole point behind probabilities: each of multiple outcomes is not necessarily equally likely.

      --
      And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
      To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
    10. Re:The odds are now at 100% by LordNimon · · Score: 1
      Maybe that's why I didn't do so well in my statistics class, but I never subscribed to the rational-degree-of-belief definition of probability. I just think it's a meaningless concept.

      Let's say for instance I'm told there's a 1% chance that I'll get into a car accident next year. So based on that, I decide that it's safe to drive a car. Then let's say that I do get into an accident at one point. What have I learned? That the 99% probability that I would be safe was absolutely worthless information to me!

      --
      And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
      To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
    11. Re:The odds are now at 100% by gagge · · Score: 1

      And you got no humor.

    12. Re:The odds are now at 100% by AxelBoldt · · Score: 1
      The rational-degree-of-belief definition is basically a measure of information. It tells you, based on the current information you have, what bet you should accept. As more information comes in, the probability changes. But all the axioms of probability apply to this concept.

      If you believe that there's a 1% chance of getting into a car accident next year, it might have a consequence for your updating (or cancelling) your insurance coverage.

    13. Re:The odds are now at 100% by ThosLives · · Score: 1
      The rational-degree-of-belief definition is basically a measure of information
      This is the correct definition of probability as far as I can tell. Any event either will or will not happen; we can only at best put a measure on how sure we are that it will or will not happen. It's also a little confusing to say "as more information comes in the probability changes"; it is a correct statement but I'm not sure even the average /. reader can correctly interpret it ;)
      --
      "There are a dozen opinions on a matter until you know the truth. Then there is only one." - CS Lewis (paraprhase)
  4. We're all gonna die! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Get all of your doomsday-cults going in time. ;-)

    1. Re:We're all gonna die! by glassjaw+rocks · · Score: 4, Funny

      Here's something odd. April 13, 2029 is a Friday. Friday the 13th is the end of the world.

      --
      -gjr
    2. Re:We're all gonna die! by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      It would take a lot more than an asteroid to destroy the Earth.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    3. Re:We're all gonna die! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2 + 0 + 2 + 9 = 13

      We are doomed!

  5. Doomed...? by Boronx · · Score: 5, Funny

    Will Bruce Willis even by alive by then?

    1. Re:Doomed...? by Howski · · Score: 1

      Bruce Willis is still alive?

    2. Re:Doomed...? by KUHurdler · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, the climax of the whole movie is that he was already dead. That's why only the kid could see him.

      --
      Fix Your Own TV - RiddledTV.com Avoid the Landfill
    3. Re:Doomed...? by pizzaman100 · · Score: 1
      Will Bruce Willis even by alive by then?

      He'll be 74 in 2029.. So he'll probably be alive.

      His daughter will definitly still be alive since she's an elf.

    4. Re:Doomed...? by Average_Joe_Sixpack · · Score: 1

      His daughter will definitly still be alive since she's an elf.

      What the heck are you smoking?

    5. Re:Doomed...? by fm6 · · Score: 1

      It true! Here's a picture! And here she is with her father. Notice how they cleverly composed the image to hide the tips of her ears!

    6. Re:Doomed...? by phaetonic · · Score: 1

      Bruce Willis is not important. The real question is, will Milla Jovovich be alive?

    7. Re:Doomed...? by PowerKe · · Score: 0, Redundant

      His daughter will definitly still be alive since she's an elf.

      I think you're talking about Liv Tyler, daughter of Steven Tyler of the band Aerosmith. Liv Tyler plays an elf in Lord of The Rings. She also plays in Armageddon as do both Bruce Willis and Steven Tyler, which is probably why you linked her to the wrong father.

      I wouldn't know what movie any of Bruce Willis' daughters plays an elf in, unless you mean she really is an elf ofcourse. :)

    8. Re:Doomed...? by PowerKe · · Score: 1

      And after typing it up I see where you're going... damn, slow evening...

  6. 2004 MN4 Asteroid Odds Keep Inch Up Again by teshuvah · · Score: 3, Funny

    I are not under stand what you is try ing to said hear.

    1. Re:2004 MN4 Asteroid Odds Keep Inch Up Again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      really, aren't there supposed to be editors here to make shit readable at least? Come on!

  7. Impact energy by b1t+r0t · · Score: 3, Insightful

    One and a half gigatons. Nice. Even if it landed in an ocean, it would still make quite a splash.

    --

    --
    "Open source is good." - Steve Jobs
    "Open source is evil." - Microsoft
    1. Re:Impact energy by HeghmoH · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Ocean would probably be worse. If it landed in the ocean, it would probably be like yesterday's unpleasantness with a great many people killed by tsunami. Landing on land, it would just make a big boom and put a lot of dirt into the air, unless it happened to land in a populated area. Worst case is a city, of course, but that's not likely.

      --
      Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
    2. Re:Impact energy by Billly+Gates · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Try a tsunami about 500x times bigger almost a mile high traveling 20 miles inland destroying everything in its site.

      Keep in mind 90% of the population lives within 100 miles of the coast.

      Devestating indeed.

    3. Re:Impact energy by SLi · · Score: 1

      Still small compared to the 22 gigatons of a magnitude 8.9 earthquake.

      See this page on the US Geological Survey for some figures on earthquakes.

    4. Re:Impact energy by HeghmoH · · Score: 2, Informative

      Are you sure? If the original poster is correct and the impact energy is half a gigaton, then it will be comparable to the energy released in the earthquake, which was about 1.8 gigatons, also according to slashdot. Of course, slashdot is not exactly a reliable source for these kinds of things.

      --
      Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
    5. Re:Impact energy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try a tsunami about 500x times bigger almost a mile high traveling 20 miles inland destroying everything in its site.

      Keep in mind 90% of the population lives within 100 miles of the coast.


      Those are BLUE States/Precincts, aren't they?

    6. Re:Impact energy by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

      How big is the asteriod?

      If its up to 2 miles wide than yeas certainly a tsunamia that big can form.

      It will be less if the mass is smaller.

      There is a creater in Arizona from a meteor that was only 600 feet long. The creater is over 2 miles wide and over 1000 feet deep.

      These things travel very fast and are loaded with energy. Some of them can travel over 100k miles an hour. Predicting the energy is taken from the speed of the object as well.

      But still even if the energy of this meteor equaled the amount of the earthquake, the results would be devestating. 11,000 people are missing so far and that is only estimated so far.

    7. Re:Impact energy by Broiler · · Score: 3, Funny

      I knew it! That is why I sit in my shack in Wyoming writing manifestos!

      --
      My sigs offend the max # of people all over the world, regardless of race, religion, color, sex or creed. It's a gift.
    8. Re:Impact energy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's about 400 meters, I think. See the original story.

    9. Re:Impact energy by LurkerXXX · · Score: 1
      You mean 90% of the population lives within 100 miles of "a" coast. (Do you even have a source for that stat to back that up?)

      If the asteroid hit in the mid Pacific, it wouldn't cause a mile high tsunami in the Atlantic. People 10 miles inland from a the coast of the Atlantic will be fine (well, as fine as anyone will be with the aftermath of that thing hitting the planet).

    10. Re:Impact energy by the_mad_poster · · Score: 0, Troll

      Not if it landed in the Gulf of Mexico. Or anywhere with a significant land mass between the point of impact and a U.S. Coastline.

      Don't be so dense you stupid welfare monkey. Besides, if the blue states were wiped out, who would subsidize your government provided trailer home and food stamps?

      Now, shut the hell up, Cletus. If I wanted to hear a pukehole talking I'd go punch a blue state drunk in the gut in the bar across the street. With your sorry lack of education, the drunk's vomiting noises would still be leaps and bounds smarter than anything you and your trailer trash friends could come up with if you put all of your inbred heads together and thought until your brains smoked like your trucks.

      Go eat your grits and attend to your mama's "special needs" hillbilly bob. I'll call you when my $500 leather shoes need a shine or I need a rag to sop up a water puddle beside one of my Bentleys.

      --
      Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
    11. Re:Impact energy by John+Hasler · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > Landing on land, it would just make a big boom
      > and put a lot of dirt into the air, unless it
      > happened to land in a populated area.

      In which case it would put a lot of dirt and buildings in the air. We will know _exactly_ where it is going to hit years in advance: plenty of time to evacuate.

      The worst case is also the most likely: in the Pacific. Even with years of warning evacuating as many a several hundred million people would be challenging and severely disruptive.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    12. Re:Impact energy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Don't be so dense you stupid welfare monkey. Besides, if the blue states were wiped out, who would subsidize your government provided trailer home and food stamps?"

      (Sniff Sniff smell the Karma burn)

      Dude you lost get over it.

      Everyone else did.....

      Loser......

    13. Re:Impact energy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Assuming same shape, density and velocity, the volume and mass of this 390 metre asteroid and the energy of the impact are about 562 times less than those of a 2-mile asteroid.

    14. Re:Impact energy by ArbitraryConstant · · Score: 1

      "How big is the asteriod?"

      I've seen estimates from 300 to 500 meters. It's no planetkiller.

      --
      I rarely criticize things I don't care about.
    15. Re:Impact energy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hint hint, the southern part of the Gulf of Mexico is a fricken impact crater.

    16. Re:Impact energy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But hitting at ~12-13 km/second it's going slower than the typical 17 km/sec. At less than 15 km/sec, there is little vaporization. It'll just be a big thud, not a fireball.

    17. Re:Impact energy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Well then, you are sitting on top of a large volcano, just ready to blow.

    18. Re:Impact energy by MinutiaeMan · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Even if the energy released in 2004-MN4's impact were roughly equal to the energy released in the recent earthquake, I seriously doubt that the effects could be considered comparable. For one thing, ALL of the asteroid's energy will be released in one gigantic explosion when it enters the atmosphere and hits the surface (either land or sea), concentrated in a relatively small area. But the earthquake's energy was released along a huge (700 miles long) segment of the undersea fault, which almost certainly dampened the effects of the quake. Not to mention that quakes typically take place at least several kilometers underground...

      (IANAGOP -- I Am Not A Geologist Or Physicist. But I am using what I think to be logical deductions based on what little I know.)

    19. Re:Impact energy by CrazyDuke · · Score: 1

      People have already said its about 390 meters wide. But, I'll add it's impact speed would be about 28 000 miles per hour or 45 000 kilometers per hour. A little slower than the estimated mean impact speed for an a near earth orbit asteriod if I remember correctly. The crater would be a few, I think about 3, miles wide.

      FYI: 600 feet (re: the Arizona impact) is about 183 meters. This one is estimated to be about 390 meters wide.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced influence is indistinguishable from control.
    20. Re:Impact energy by Nerull · · Score: 1

      'Impact' tsunamis (we've seen them from landslides) are much, much larger than even the most powerful earthquakes.

    21. Re:Impact energy by platypus · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I don't think it's so easy. While you are right that in deep water, the energy of the earthquake was distributed across a very long wave with a very low amplitude (i.e. big wavelength, sic), the shallower shore acted as a kind of "lense", concentrating the energy to a smaller area (shorter wavelength, higher amplitude).
      I assume an asteroid might cause waves with shorter wavelengths even in deep water, but OTOH there'd be not such a "lense effect".
      In the end, the product of amplitude, wavelength and the square of the speed of the wavefront determines the energy, so waves being taller in deep water does not mean they'll be more destructive when hitting the shore - i.e. the earthquake causes the whole of the sea to "move", while an asteroid might mainly impact the surface.
      Since at around 800 km/h, wind resistance is a real factor, higher waves might even be considerably dampened on their way through the sea.

    22. Re:Impact energy by RhettLivingston · · Score: 1

      As I remember it, the Soviets tested at least one thermonuclear device in the gigaton range and were said to have some larger devices that they never tested. This isn't exactly an extinction event.

    23. Re:Impact energy by avandesande · · Score: 1

      i believe the ussr created a 500 megaton nuclear device. This is close to the theoretical limit for nuclear weapons.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    24. Re:Impact energy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The largest Soviet Bomb, the Tsar Bomba, was a 50 megaton blast.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Bomba

      not even close to a gigaton-

      HOWEVER - destruction does not scale linearly with yield (as has been said many times on here)...

      you if it strikes land, you probably don't want to be within about 1000km.... other than that you'll be fine though.

    25. Re:Impact energy by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 1

      Not true; the largest nuke of all, "Tsar Bomba" had a theoretical yield of 100MT. Its actual yield when detonated was closer to 50MT.

      --
      You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
    26. Re:Impact energy by Vicsun · · Score: 1

      Not quite as big as you might be expecting. A quake that rates 9.0 on the Richter scale, like the recent nastiness that rocked Southern Asia, releases 32,000Mt of energy. That's 32 gigatons. The asteroid no longer seems that scary.

    27. Re:Impact energy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least it's not one and a half jigatons.

    28. Re:Impact energy by DanteLysin · · Score: 1

      The amount of energy released will depend on the velocity and angle of impact. You can do the math on the catastrophe calculator.

    29. Re:Impact energy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are a lot of things that factor into making the asteroid impact vastly worse. One is in an ocean impact it's going to drag a lot of air in behind it (how your butt gets wet when you take a small dense crap), and ever worse it's going to vaporize a tremendous volume of water, and then add a 8.9 or so earthquake on top of that.

      If we can vote, I'd vote for the Indian ocean. Mostly because the vast majority of the people who live in the area are too poor to understand the implications even if they were to find out, let alone hold it against me. I like where I live, 25 years ins't enough time for me to evolve gills, and spongebob square pants is for stoners.

    30. Re:Impact energy by Martin+Blank · · Score: 1

      The Lituya Bay tsunami of 1958 was ~1700 feet high (it was in a harbor bordered by mountains -- almost a fjord, I guess). One boat was actually carried over a hill in the middle of the harbor. It was caused by a rockslide comprised of some 40 million cubic yards of material sliding into the bay after a magnitude-8 earthquake.

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    31. Re:Impact energy by fyngyrz · · Score: 1
      The asteroid no longer seems that scary

      That's because you're not considering some very important factors. An earthquake releases energy quite slowly by comparison. It releases it far underground, generally speaking, where the energy is distributed in many directions, a great deal of which is away from the surface directly overhead in a typical earthquake scenario.

      An asteroid impact releases most of its energy much faster, in a much more focused (tight pattern) manner, and always right at the surface and subsequently into the atmosphere. This leads to other effects; extreme amounts of heat (notably lacking in an earthquake, which is a big hint about rate of energy release) light and radiation (likewise) and explosive ejection of matter -- be it water, dirt, rock and bioforms in various states of destruction, or all of the above.

      Once large amounts of ejecta are released into the atmosphere, weather effects may result. They can range from no more than pretty sunsets to sunblock to a degree that can cause winter-like weather.

      Because of the speed of the release of energy, it is certain that no one at ground zero will survive. Those located directly above an earthquake's epicenter have a very good chance of surviving, if "stuff" doesn't fall on them, or they don't fall into crevasses. A really big earthquake could break your legs and stuff, but probably wouldn't kill you. Slow is better, when it comes to large energy releases.

      Even a very small asteroid earth-impact at typical speeds will kill anyone at ground zero.

      Let me put it into context for you from a martial arts perspective, using your intuitive knowledge of the world:

      Imagine a pillow with a fairly rigid exterior weighing about ten pounds (22 kg) balanced on your head. Does the idea bother you? It shouldn't. The weight will be distributed over at least a few square inches, and it'll just sit there, looking stupid.

      Now, imagine a pin, weighing a fraction of an ounce, standing on your head, and a pillow that weighs only one pound (2.2 kg) balanced on that. This idea should bother you, because the pin will be driven quite far into your skull, very annoying for most people.

      Less energy applied in the latter case; but in the former case, the larger energy load is applied to a wide area, and is easily dealt with. In the latter case, a smaller energy load is applied to a small area, and cannot be stopped by your anatomy's built-in degree of toughness.

      That's why martial artists punch with small areas of the knuckle; the smaller the impacting point, the more annoying the impact to the target, given any specific amount of kinetic energy developed by the mass of the rigid system (forearm, upper arm, shoulder, sometimes more depending on the technique) that ends with a fist, convolved with the speed with which it can be made to strike the target.

      Think of an earthquake as a big, heavy, soft pillow aimed at your feet, and an asteroid as a small nail, being driven by a not so heavy hammer towards your head -- at several tens of thousands of miles an hour.

      That's the ticket.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    32. Re:Impact energy by Macdude · · Score: 1

      Worst case is a city, of course, but that's not likely.
      Worse case for a land strike would probably be the Yosemite Caldera Volcano.

      --
      "Grab them by the pussy" -- President of the United States of America
    33. Re:Impact energy by Tomfrh · · Score: 1

      I believe the sun might care to correct you on that last statement...

    34. Re:Impact energy by DarkMantle · · Score: 1

      I see some faults in your logic. If it hits in the water, well, did you see "The Day After Tomorrow"? remember when the water hit new york, well, make the waves at least twice as high. (And remove the cold)

      And as for "Landing on land, it would just make a big boom and put a lot of dirt into the air" that "a lot of dirt" could be enough to have permanant clouds over a large area, blocking out the sun for quite a while. This would have repercussions on a global scale as it would effect weather patterns in that area. Also, have dirt and dust in the air can add to an increase in electrical build up causing one hell of an lightning storm covering miles, but there'd be no rain to put out the fires as they start.

      All in all, if it's more then a few meters wide, it don't matter where it hits, it'll cause enough damage. (Think about no crops in north america because we don't see the sun for 6-8 weeks.)

      --
      DarkMantle I been bored, so I started a blog.
    35. Re:Impact energy by rhuntley12 · · Score: 1

      My head hurts, I'm just going to move to Kansas.

  8. April 13, 2029 by akirchhoff · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Would this be Friday the 13th?

    1. Re:April 13, 2029 by Frodo+Looijaard · · Score: 1

      Yes it would. Nice spotting...

    2. Re:April 13, 2029 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, yes, it would be on a Friday.

    3. Re:April 13, 2029 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Well actually, yes. And this has been covered here before.

    4. Re:April 13, 2029 by glitch! · · Score: 5, Funny

      Would this be Friday the 13th?

      That's right, Hot Fudge Sundae arrives on a Friday...

      --
      A dingo ate my sig...
    5. Re:April 13, 2029 by JohnGrahamCumming · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yes, April 13, 2029 is a Friday.

      John.

    6. Re:April 13, 2029 by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      in linux
      # cal 2029

      yes, that is Friday the 13th.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    7. Re:April 13, 2029 by paradoxmember · · Score: 1

      Yes, it most certainly would be.

      Friday, April 13, 2029.

      I can just hear all the supersticious freaks now. Like a date on a calendar could possibly be bad luck... silly.. it is those black cats you have to watch out for.

    8. Re:April 13, 2029 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, it is Friday 13th.

    9. Re:April 13, 2029 by HermDog · · Score: 2, Funny

      That would be "Fridae," of course.

      --
      JADBP
    10. Re:April 13, 2029 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      How about 'calendar -t 13.04.2029'

      Apr 13 Thomas Jefferson born, 1743
      Apr 13 Laotian New Year (3 days) in Laos
      Apr 13 National Day in Chad
      Apr 13 Songkron Day in Thailand
      Apr 13 Aujourd'hui, c'est la St(e) Ida.
      Apr 13 N'oubliez pas les Herménégilde !
      Apr 13 Earth destroyed

    11. Re:April 13, 2029 by archen · · Score: 1

      Friday the 13th, good friday, and my birthday.

      Busy day for my apocalypse. Whew.

      Also about a year before I retire, so I better live it up while I can. =)

    12. Re:April 13, 2029 by UniverseIsADoughnut · · Score: 1

      interesting. All the more reason to say to this thing.

      Rock on, Asteroid MN4, Rock on.

    13. Re:April 13, 2029 by FreeUser · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, assuming you're running a modern operating system (Linux, OS X, FreeBSD) ...


      $ cal 2029
      [...]
      April
      Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
      1 2 3 4 5 6 7
      8 9 10 11 12 13 14
      15 16 17 18 19 20 21
      22 23 24 25 26 27 28
      29 30
      [...]


      So yeah, we're all going to die on Friday the 13th (of April), 2029 ... if this thing hits (and we don't do anything about it in the next 25 years).

      All praise superstition ...

      --
      The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
    14. Re:April 13, 2029 by Enigma_Man · · Score: 1

      Great book. I can't help but picture it myself as well :D

      -Jesse

      --
      Nothing says "unprofessional job" like wrinkles in your duct tape.
    15. Re:April 13, 2029 by Flashbck · · Score: 1

      Well, assuming you're running a modern operating system (Linux, OS X, FreeBSD) and you know how to use the cal program...

      $ cal 4 2029
      April 2029
      Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
      1 2 3 4 5 6 7
      8 9 10 11 12 13 14
      15 16 17 18 19 20 21
      22 23 24 25 26 27 28
      29 30

    16. Re:April 13, 2029 by bluenirve · · Score: 2, Funny

      Wait, I found a slashdot fake! The guy's running in root, so he can't be a real geek.

    17. Re:April 13, 2029 by pizzaman100 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually Good Friday falls on March 30 in 2029. Unless you happen to be on the Orthodox calander, in which case it falls on April 6.

    18. Re:April 13, 2029 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Just in case you still aren't sure, despite 20 other posters verifying this fact, April 13, 2029 is indeed Friday the 13th.

      Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply
      duplicating what has already been said.

    19. Re:April 13, 2029 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Real geeks like to live on the edge.

    20. Re:April 13, 2029 by ender- · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It will also be my 55th birthday. Happy birthday to me....

      And for what it's worth, 2029 = 2+0+2+9 = 13 as well.

      Let the coincidence number geek field day begin.

      ender-

    21. Re:April 13, 2029 by Lost_In_Specs · · Score: 1

      Finally after 35 years of bad birthdays on April 13th, I finally have a possibly memorable one to look forward to - even if it is 24+ years away.

      Note: whenever my birthday falls on Friday the 13th (like the one in 2029), it's also Good Friday.

    22. Re:April 13, 2029 by Free+Bird · · Score: 1

      Wow, the fourth of Undecember is a Friday? Shocking!

    23. Re:April 13, 2029 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would this be Friday the 13th?

      That's right, Hot Fudge Sundae arrives on a Friday...



      Could someone please explain the joke? :)

    24. Re:April 13, 2029 by PingPongBoy · · Score: 1

      Then it's a miss. Nothing ever bad happens on Fri. 13.

      Update: the probability of impact is 1/13.

      --
      Know your pads. One time pad: good for cryptography. Two timing pad: where to take your mistress.
    25. Re:April 13, 2029 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guess someone doesn't even know how to manipulate their shell's look! You don't know how easy it is to make the command line look like root for every user, bah...

    26. Re:April 13, 2029 by Lord+Grey · · Score: 1

      It's from Lucifer's Hammer by Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle. Great book.

      --
      // Beyond Here Lie Dragons
    27. Re:April 13, 2029 by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 2, Funny

      Nah, he's a real geek. He's running in root on someone else's box.

      --
      You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
    28. Re:April 13, 2029 by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      Another poster has already pointed you to the Niven/Pournells book _Lucifer's Hammer_, wherin a comet makes a close pass and "calves" - i.e. it's breaking up a bit and arrives as a field of chunks around the main core. Some of the calves hit the earth causing considerable devastation - but short of an extinction event. More like a moderate-sized thermonuclear war, including the nuclear winter but minus the fallout.

      During the months preceeding the close encounter, when it's believed it will be a near-miss (and a spectacular lightshow) but the media is exploring the possiblity of a collision, a scientist is interviewed on a tv-magazine style show. He and the host get into discussing the structure of a comet, and rather than the usual "dirty snowball" comparison, he starts by comparing it to a large scoop of ice cream. As they add in the rocks, outgassing "ices", and such this evolves into a hot fudge sundae (rocks for nuts, I think the atmospheric-gas ices as whipped cream, etc.), and as the analogy keeps holding together it gets funny and the two talking heads start cracking each other up. (The point of the discussion, of course, that even a hot fudge sundae, if it's the size of Manhattan Island and falling at solar escape velocity, can do a lot of damage.)

      Punchline of the interview becomes "Hot Fudge Sundae falls on a Tuesdae this week." (Since the flyby is due on a Tuesday.) This becomes a catchphrase in popular culture and is repeated a lot during the period before the impact.

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    29. Re:April 13, 2029 by letxa2000 · · Score: 1
      Screw it, I'm going to tell them not to withhold any of my taxes in 2028 then. We're not going to make it to April 15th so screw it.

  9. What? by mskfisher · · Score: 1, Funny

    http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/risk/2004mn4.html

    We've killed Neo! Now we're doomed for sure!

    --
    0x0D 0x0A
    1. Re:What? by ian+rogers · · Score: 0

      Actually, when Neo died, it saved everyone from Smith.

    2. Re:What? by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

      We've killed Neo! Now we're doomed for sure!

      Calm down, he's sleeping beauty: he'll just respawn...

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

  10. Can this week go any worse? by lordsilence · · Score: 1

    First the 1/300 hit probability.. then down to this? Not only will it be the 13th of the month, but friday the 13th if it'd hit...

    And also the damn tsunami hitting the asia?

    What next? SCO wins the case against IBM? ...

  11. So.... by Woofles · · Score: 1

    This asteriod is getting better and better odds, however it is what, 14 years away? The odds aren't that good for it to hit us so far, if it gets to 50% I will start to worry. It is also important to note that it is extremely difficult to accuratley predict the path of such an asteriod that is so far away, there are many things that can change over that time, and other factors that we may not even be aware of. Personally I don't see this as to much of a threat , but it does raise the issue of needing more money put into research and defense in case an asteriod is found, that is coming to Earth, we must have some way to defend ourselves against such a collision, since it is only a matter of time before it happens again.

    --
    Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes something special to be different
    1. Re:So.... by JonGaudette · · Score: 1

      In what messed-up world does 2029 - 2005 = 14 years difference? *sigh*, and I thought that Slashdotters were suppose to be a relatively intelligent crowd.

    2. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This asteriod is getting better and better odds, however it is what, 14 years away?

      2029 - 2004 = 14? Better put that money on math education.

    3. Re:So.... by dustinbarbour · · Score: 2, Interesting

      but it does raise the issue of needing more money put into research and defense in case an asteriod is found

      Does anyone get the idea that someone could possibly be playing with the numbers to get funding for someone's pet project? I put a certain level of trust in NASA and I don't think the current data is necessarily inaccurate, but the thought did cross my mind. What do Slashdotters think?

    4. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Using what calendar is 2029 only 14 years away?

    5. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I thought that Slashdotters were suppose to be a relatively intelligent crowd.

      Slashdotters intelligent? Don't you read the comments in here?

    6. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "we must have some way to defend ourselves against such a collision, since it is only a matter of time before it happens again."

      In my somewhat ignorant opinion, it would be a really good idea to place several rocket motors on the surface of that asteroid ASAP. The longer you wait, the more power would be needed to move the asteroid out of the way.

    7. Re:So.... by Viking+Coder · · Score: 1

      What exactly would you like the Return on your Investment to be?

      The Return - all life on earth is not destroyed.

      How much are you willing to Invest?

      On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.

      --
      Education is the silver bullet.
    8. Re:So.... by Lost_In_Specs · · Score: 1

      On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.

      Reminds me of an old website of mine. It had a %100 accurate fortune telling PERL CGI script. It had one response to all queries:
      "You are going to die."

      Before you ask why I did it in a script, let me just say I was even more of an idiot back then.

    9. Re:So.... by iocat · · Score: 1

      You sound like one of those dudes who are like "Global Warming my ass, it was cold here yesterday."

      --

      Dude, I think I can see my house from here.

    10. Re:So.... by dustinbarbour · · Score: 1

      No no.. As I stated, I trust the data coming out of NASA (JPL?) and think that asteroids are a danger that needs to be dealt with. All I'm saying is that this asteroid isn't really moving much relatively. It;s still going in a rather straight (err.. elliptical) path. Why is some rocket scientist needing to revise his numbers over and over? I would think that we could be somewhat accurate right off the bat. I mean, this adjustment has been an entire order of magnitude. Just saying that the thought crossed my mind.. didn't stay long.

    11. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, it was cold here yesterday. No really, it was. I swear.

    12. Re:So.... by escher · · Score: 1

      Be nice. He must be new here.

    13. Re:So.... by PingPongBoy · · Score: 1

      If you don't believe the report, it's out here for the world to criticize. With the odds increasing, the odds of someone doing an independent calculation also increase.

      --
      Know your pads. One time pad: good for cryptography. Two timing pad: where to take your mistress.
    14. Re:So.... by jamesgriff · · Score: 1

      Using this calender (Use Mode=Sadistic)

    15. Re:So.... by escher · · Score: 1

      Using what calendar is 2029 only 14 years away?

      That depends on A) The mass of your planet, and B) The relative velocity of the observer making the calculation.

    16. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The odds aren't that good for it to hit us so far, if it gets to 50% I will start to worry.

      I'm sorry, you what? You're saying you wouldn't be concerned about a catastrophe on the scale of the recent earthquake with anything less than 50% odds. Think about it. You'd happily roll a die in the knowledge that if a six came up, tens of thousands of people would die. You'd happily put a revolver to your head knowing that two of the chambers were loaded. But you'd draw the line at tossing a coin to determine the fate of the world. That's not very coherent risk management, you know.

    17. Re:So.... by 17028 · · Score: 1

      Let's say I take a picture of a speeding car and gave you its approximate location. Could you tell how fast and in what direction it was moving from that picture? What if I took two pictures? What if I took a hundred? Obviously the more useful data you get, the easier it gets to figure out.

      As more data is fed into the orbital calculation the more accurately they can predict how close it'll pass. Simply put; I don't think you have a good concept of the distances involved.

    18. Re:So.... by Captain+Nitpick · · Score: 1
      Does anyone get the idea that someone could possibly be playing with the numbers to get funding for someone's pet project? I put a certain level of trust in NASA and I don't think the current data is necessarily inaccurate, but the thought did cross my mind. What do Slashdotters think?

      This is being observed by numerous independent groups in multiple nations. It'd take a full-on conspiracy and not just a couple of guys fudging numbers.

      --
      But then again, I could be wrong.
    19. Re:So.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does anyone get the idea that someone could possibly be playing with the numbers to get funding for someone's pet project?

      Nah, I am surprised that the asteroid hasn't just vanished though, due to Bush's interference with science in just about every other branch of government.

    20. Re:So.... by Captain+Nitpick · · Score: 1
      All I'm saying is that this asteroid isn't really moving much relatively. It;s still going in a rather straight (err.. elliptical) path. Why is some rocket scientist needing to revise his numbers over and over? I would think that we could be somewhat accurate right off the bat. I mean, this adjustment has been an entire order of magnitude.

      This rock's moving 16ish billion miles over the next 24 years. In order to predict if it hits, they need to be accurate to a few thousand miles. Give them a little time to sort the numbers out.

      --
      But then again, I could be wrong.
    21. Re:So.... by mangu · · Score: 1
      Well, apart from your 2029-2004=14 math, which people have already noted, why do you think that "it is extremely difficult to accuratley predict the path of such an asteriod that is so far away"?, and "there are many things that can change over that time, and other factors that we may not even be aware of"?


      Exactly *which* things can change in 24 years? Orbital mechanics, maybe? Or the universal gravity constant? Do you want to imply that it really is an universal gravity variable, instead?


      No, there is only one reason why we can't state with absolute certainty that that asteroid won't hit the Earth: we have tracked its orbit for a relatively short time. We do not have enough observations to determine its orbit with enough accuracy. Given more time, we will know with enough precision its orbit so we can calculate exactly where the asteroid will pass in 2029.


      It's not difficult, nothing will change in orbital mechanics. We just don't have enough data right now to calculate with enough precision that particular orbit 24 years in advance. A few more weeks or months of observations will clarify things.

    22. Re:So.... by MidoriKid · · Score: 1

      You all had better listen to Woofles. He's from the -future-!

    23. Re:So.... by Woofles · · Score: 1

      Did I say it was 14 years:|

      --
      Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes something special to be different
    24. Re:So.... by shaitand · · Score: 1

      There orbit itself is one factor which could potentially change between now and the impact date. Orbital mechanics could well change within 25yrs along with any other of our theories.

      However, the more likely cause would be impact with something else large enough to alter the asteroid's orbit.

  12. By how things are going... by DarkHelmet · · Score: 5, Funny
    That gives slashdotters...

    24 more years to try and get laid.

    --
    /^[A-Z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}$/i
    1. Re:By how things are going... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I will be getting plenty laid in my asteroid proof bunker everyone will want to be in. Well I better get back to digging now...

    2. Re:By how things are going... by isa-kuruption · · Score: 5, Funny

      Stop flaming and/or giving us false hope!

    3. Re:By how things are going... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But what if this guy gets your bid before then? :)

    4. Re:By how things are going... by System.out.println() · · Score: 1

      So this asteroid has better odds of hitting earth then?

    5. Re:By how things are going... by TopShelf · · Score: 1

      Actually, I think that will become the new /.er's pickup line:

      "You know we only have 24 more years to live, don't you? Please, hold me..."

      --
      Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
    6. Re:By how things are going... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      24 more years to try and get laid.

      Now what would the odds be for that. 1/120004?

      No, sorry, now I was just giving false hope for Slashdotter number 120004. I hope he/she didn't read this comment.

    7. Re:By how things are going... by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1
      Me for President of the United States in 2020.

      You don't feel like aiming for 2028?

    8. Re:By how things are going... by hashwolf · · Score: 1

      And if we remain alive after the asteroid hits we'll have even more chance of getting laid! Think repopulation.

      --
      - "They misunderestimated me."
    9. Re:By how things are going... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since slashdotters seem to have a hard time.. and there is no FM to R, here's a howto on getting laid:

      1. Get ~$2000, fly to vegas
      2. Find a brothel, they're legal and the girls are super clean
      3. Have the best sex of your life; these girls are professional fuckers and you will never find a anyone who can fuck as well as these girls, plus there's none of the messy crying and fighting and shit
      4. Realize how empty and meaningless it was and get depressed (this happens with all sex, so don't worry)
      5a. Goto step 1

      or

      5b. Realize you're gay, goto step 1 but s/vegas/san francisco/g. ...

      7. Profit!

    10. Re:By how things are going... by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      Argh! and here I just turned 24. That means I am now middle aged!

      *edit* - Not that I mean I'm a middle aged virgin, as replying to this post would seem to imply.

    11. Re:By how things are going... by Xugumad · · Score: 1

      Or, hey, we get to test how serious all those women were about "Not even if you were the last man alive"...

    12. Re:By how things are going... by isa-kuruption · · Score: 1

      Why be a lame duck and ineffective leader for 1 year when I can do it for 8 years? Seems highly illogical to me!

  13. Java applet by spac3manspiff · · Score: 1

    The java applet looks cool, too bad it takes forever to load.

  14. Bugs in NASA's software? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It predicts two impacts on the same day of 2031. How can we trust these numbers?

    1. Re:Bugs in NASA's software? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well duh, it is going to hit one side of the earth and then blow a hole clean out through the other side!

  15. Anarchy! by Lussarn · · Score: 5, Funny

    When can we start the looting?

    1. Re:Anarchy! by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      Without knowing precisely what the danger is, I would say it's time for all of us to crack each other's heads open and feast on the goo inside.

    2. Re:Anarchy! by EaterOfDog · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I really need an armful of canned hams and Boobah dolls when an asteroid blows half of the crust off of our planet. Mine, all mine

      --

      Crushing my karma one post at a time.
    3. Re:Anarchy! by slumpy · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing I'm not the only one who secretly wants it to hit.

      --
      http://www.commaecho.com
    4. Re:Anarchy! by fm6 · · Score: 1

      Another half-assed anarchist. Tearing down civilization requires individual initiative! If you want to be a lawless rebel, get started right now -- don't wait for some "asteroid" to give you permission!

  16. Friday the 13th, part xxxxx by 14erCleaner · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Being a Unix geek, my first response to this article was to do a "cal 2029".

    Sure enough, April 13, 2029 is a Friday.

    Maybe that old superstition was a premonition instead...

    --
    Have you read my blog lately?
    1. Re:Friday the 13th, part xxxxx by 14erCleaner · · Score: 5, Funny

      On the bright side, this does solve the 2038 rollover of the 32-bit time_t.

      --
      Have you read my blog lately?
    2. Re:Friday the 13th, part xxxxx by nizo · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Plus if you add the digits in 2029 you get 13! Ehh, maybe we should start building the nuclear bomb carrying rockets right now?

    3. Re:Friday the 13th, part xxxxx by Surazal · · Score: 1

      On the bright side, this does solve the 2038 rollover of the 32-bit time_t.

      Sort of in the same way a shotgun solves the problem of having too many viruses on your computer.

      --
      --- Journals are boring; Go to my web page instead
    4. Re:Friday the 13th, part xxxxx by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep! And gas prices should fall as we might as well use them all up by then anyways. Plus who cares if Social Securtiy will run out! Unless we can invent some sort of timestasis to put Bruce Willis & Steve Buscemi into, we're all doomed DOOMED I SAY!

    5. Re:Friday the 13th, part xxxxx by Glonoinha · · Score: 1

      Speaking of which - anybody considering what to do about the 32-bit time thing? Granted we have some time, but we got some time before we have to worry about the asteroid and I would guess the 32-bit time thingy is a lot more likely to actually hit.

      --
      Glonoinha the MebiByte Slayer
    6. Re:Friday the 13th, part xxxxx by FrankSchwab · · Score: 1

      Ehh, minor problem... It also nicely solves the looming Social Security insolvency, predicted to occur sometime between 2018 and 2034... /frank

      --
      And the worms ate into his brain.
    7. Re:Friday the 13th, part xxxxx by 14erCleaner · · Score: 1
      Plus if you add the digits in 2029 you get 13!

      Whoa, I really didn't need to hear that. Time to panic....

      --
      Have you read my blog lately?
    8. Re:Friday the 13th, part xxxxx by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Move to a 64 bit time as we move to 64 bit computers? Granted a lot of work is going to have to be done in the realm of file formats and database changes but that is the fault of no one but the designers of said works...

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    9. Re:Friday the 13th, part xxxxx by ViolentGreen · · Score: 4, Funny

      Plus, if you addd the digits in 13, you get 4 (April being the fourth month of the year.) On top of that if, you subtract 4 (month) and 13 (day) from 2029 and add those digits, you get 5 which is amazingly the same number that you get when you sum the digits in 202 and subtract that from 9.

      Point being, well actually I have no point.

      --
      Not everything is analogous to cars. Car analogies rarely work.
    10. Re:Friday the 13th, part xxxxx by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but that is the fault of no one but the designers of said works

      I always ask from my boss does the application need to work more than 30 years etc. And if the reply is that it doesn't I don't spend time fixing the future problems. I don't like making crappy software but sadly that is for what they pay for me. On the bright side:
      - That will make sure future programmers will have some work to do.
      - The age of software is hardly ever more than 30 years, so it is not yet time to worry about that.

    11. Re:Friday the 13th, part xxxxx by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Civilization Over.
      Extinction = Very Yes.

    12. Re:Friday the 13th, part xxxxx by ender- · · Score: 1

      Plus, if you addd the digits in 13, you get 4 (April being the fourth month of the year.) On top of that if, you subtract 4 (month) and 13 (day) from 2029 and add those digits, you get 5 which is amazingly the same number that you get when you sum the digits in 202 and subtract that from 9.

      Hmmm, add to all this the fact that 04/13/2029 will be my 55th birthday, and I start to get the idea that it will be a very bad day for me. Such a shame, I usually have great luck on Friday 13th's.

      ender-

    13. Re:Friday the 13th, part xxxxx by 14erCleaner · · Score: 1
      Hmmm, add to all this the fact that 04/13/2029 will be my 55th birthday, and I start to get the idea that it will be a very bad day for me. Such a shame, I usually have great luck on Friday 13th's.

      Does your birthday always fall on Friday the 13th? :)

      --
      Have you read my blog lately?
    14. Re:Friday the 13th, part xxxxx by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 1

      I don't think it will be nearly as hard as fixing Y2K was. The code doesn't need to change one iota other than to just change the type of "time_t" in the header files. (You *have* been using "time_t" and not just saying "int", right???) Then the only remaining problem becomes what to do with any files that have the 32-bit int time stored in them, and that's not a complicated conversion program to write.

      Again, just like y2k, the hard part will be verifying that all problem areas have been found. But unlike y2k, fixing them once they are found will be very simple in every case. The program changes needed will not be of the algorithmic kind (a program having to change how it parses a string date) like they were in y2k, but of the data type kind (change this variable's integer type where it is declared and then leave the rest of the code alone 99% of the time, and if that integer was written to a file, then that file might need a quick ad-hoc converter program written to convert it, but it won't be complex.)

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    15. Re:Friday the 13th, part xxxxx by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do people really find the homestarrunner stuff funny? Seriously, I'm not trolling -- I just don't get what's funny about it. Every single cartoon I've seen from there has left me going "is that it?"

    16. Re:Friday the 13th, part xxxxx by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 1

      I wonder if anyone has ever run into a year 1902 problem on the negative end of 32-bit time_t? (Keeping track of a title deed to an old property, or keeping track of interest on an account that has been around a long time, or trying to store what someone's date of birth is - it may seem odd today to think of someone that old being alive, but 32-bit time_t has been in use for quite some time now. It is feasable to imagine lots of people in 1980 or 1990 being old enough to encounter that problem.)

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    17. Re:Friday the 13th, part xxxxx by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      I'm going to charge $200 an hour to fix it. No, $300 an hour. Teach them to lay me off for 9 months a few years back.
      Note, all figures will be adjusted for inflation, and the rising cost of healthcare.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    18. Re:Friday the 13th, part xxxxx by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      And if you add the first two numbers of your slashdot ID, you get 9, and if you add the last 3 numbers you get 11.
      Go get 'im boys. Paul

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    19. Re:Friday the 13th, part xxxxx by cliveholloway · · Score: 1

      Not everything is analogous to cars. Car analogies rarely work

      That's like saying not every car is a Mercedes. Unless of course, you describe a Mercedes as being a vehicle with 4 wheels and seats, in which case all cars are Mercedes and your arguement falls flat, you see.

      cLive ;-)

      --
      -- Trinity in high heels carrying a whip: The donimatrix - there is no spoonerism
    20. Re:Friday the 13th, part xxxxx by aminorex · · Score: 1

      > great luck

      In case you didn't notice, each 4/13 you get another year older and deeper in debt.

      --
      -I like my women like I like my tea: green-
    21. Re:Friday the 13th, part xxxxx by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm in agreement with you.

    22. Re:Friday the 13th, part xxxxx by Surazal · · Score: 1

      I like to make fun of people who think that nukes are great ways to make new parking lots. It's not that I'm anti-nuke; I'm anti-stupid.

      Also, I like to make fun of creationists (or intelligent designers, or whatever their calling themselves these days). So sue me.

      --
      --- Journals are boring; Go to my web page instead
    23. Re:Friday the 13th, part xxxxx by Big+Nothing · · Score: 1

      Point taken.

      --
      SIG: TAKE OFF EVERY 'CAPTAIN'!!
  17. Okay... Mars Colony? by LWolenczak · · Score: 1

    Two things we need to do.... and I hope this helps.

    1) Get off our island earth and spread. Mars?
    2) Create powerful space based energy weapons to destroy this big rock.

    Now, a few other things that would be nice:

    * Star Ships that travel faster then the speed of light!

    * All sorts of neat technologies.

    1. Re:Okay... Mars Colony? by Planesdragon · · Score: 1

      Sheesh.

      twenty years is more than enough time to deflect it. And energy weapons aren't what we'd use--maybe a series of rockets, but not the kind of energy weapons that we'd use on ICBMs.

    2. Re:Okay... Mars Colony? by iabervon · · Score: 1

      Actually, we don't want to destroy the rock; we want to divert it. If we destroy it, we'll just get hit by lots of smaller pieces (which will burn up more due to the greater surface area, but not by enough to really matter). On the other hand, pushing it over a bit while it's pretty far away will cause it to miss us entirely (assuming it would have hit us otherwise). Attach a rocket and push it gently aside, like you're pushing a car.

    3. Re:Okay... Mars Colony? by Mantorp · · Score: 1
      Attach a rocket and push it gently aside, like you're pushing a car.

      You push your car with a rocket? Cool.

      I shot bottle rockets at cars once, does that count for anything?

    4. Re:Okay... Mars Colony? by robogymnast · · Score: 2, Funny

      1) Get off our island earth and spread. Mars?
      2) Create powerful space based energy weapons to destroy this big rock.


      3) Profit?

      --
      unzip ; strip ; touch ; grep ; find ; finger ; mount ; fsck ; more ; yes ; fsck ; umount ; sleep
    5. Re:Okay... Mars Colony? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Assuming you could make it happen, vaporizing one side of it (also assuming it's not rotating which would complicate things considerably) with a space-based chemical laser might not be a bad idea. Throwing something big, explosive, and carrying its own oxidizer is a good idea too. Could we maybe organize something like a fuel-air bomb carrying all its own air? Well, several of them, of course. On the other hand, we already know how to make those work.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:Okay... Mars Colony? by morcego · · Score: 1

      1) Get off our island earth and spread. Mars?
      2) Create powerful space based energy weapons to destroy this big rock.

      3) ?????
      4) Profit

      Sounds fun. When do we start ?

      --
      morcego
    7. Re:Okay... Mars Colony? by MinutiaeMan · · Score: 1

      Y'know, this whole scenario reminds me a lot of the setup for that wretched computer game "Outpost" from about a decade ago. ;-)

    8. Re:Okay... Mars Colony? by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Have we reviewed the chances of this asteroid hitting Mars?

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    9. Re:Okay... Mars Colony? by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Well, if we only nudge it, we are just delaying the inevitable. We need to make it hit something else. Something we don't care much about. France was already mentioned, but I would suggest something on another planet, or the Sun. If we divert it into the Sun, perhaps it will add to the fuel and make our Solar System last a bit longer.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    10. Re:Okay... Mars Colony? by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 1

      Actually the problem with meteor deflection strategies has always been that by the time the measurements become precise enough to know with certainty that the rock will hit us, it will be too late to enact them. The equations are such that small variations in measure result in large variations in results if you try to calculate things out years in advance. Right now, with the event expected 20 years away, the probability is still only 1 in 43. That's not enough risk to wake up the world and get us cracking on a solution yet.

      I think the most sensible solution is to attach a propulsion craft to the rock by a tether and pull on the rock. (The craft would have to be built such that its exhaust does not bathe the cable tether in heat and melt it, so it would look a bit goofy, with engines far out on arms.) Basically, the ship would have to:

      1 - Look at the spin of the rock, and pick a point to shoot for that is near one of the "poles" of its spin. And the tether would need a rotating coupling in it so it can spin with the rock a bit. The reason for wanting to anchor at a pole of the spin is so that the momentum of the spinning rock doesn't "spool up" the tether like a yo-yo and pull the craft in to it.

      2 - Then fire the engines of the craft, with the craft programmed to orient itself such that it just pulls in whatever direction the spin of the rock's axis is pointed. With this thing, it really doesn't matter which direction you divert the rock - as long as you alter its tragectory with enough time to spare before impact, it will miss - regardless of whether you made it go faster, slower, or pushed it laterally.

      The reason I like this is that you don't have to deal with the spin of the rock, Just go ahead and let it spin. It will eventually spin up the craft to match it's spin, and that's okay too. Just let it happen and keep pulling. The use of a tether, instead of attaching the rocket directly to the rock, ensures that the thrust can be guaranteed not to cause any additional spin, and if anything it can only reduce spin, not increase it.

      Hmm... Then again, if the rock is small enough maybe it's not held together by very much gravity. Perhaps we *do* want to spin it a lot, and hope that makes it break apart. Nahh - probably a bad idea.

      Although if we do go with the "blow it up" approach, it would make a lot of sense to get it spinning as much as possible before hitting the detonator - that would help fling the peices father away from the center once it breaks.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

  18. Assuming everyone dies... by KaiBeezy · · Score: 4, Funny


    this is more likely to kill you than ANY OTHER death due to injury in your lifetime!

    Odds of Death Due to Injury, National Safety Council

  19. Tinfoil hat by KingDaveRa · · Score: 2, Funny

    A tinfoil hat isn't gunna stand a chance against this thing.

    1. Re:Tinfoil hat by Mr2cents · · Score: 1

      You can always ask your supplier for an upgrade to a depleted uranium hat.. (Although I wonder why you would need a hat when you're blasted back to spacedust).

      --
      "It's too bad that stupidity isn't painful." - Anton LaVey
    2. Re:Tinfoil hat by Rick.C · · Score: 2, Funny
      A tinfoil hat isn't gunna stand a chance against this thing.

      True. For this you need copper foil.

      --
      You were 80% angel, 10% demon. The rest was hard to explain. - Over The Rhine
      "Math in a song is good."-Linford
    3. Re:Tinfoil hat by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 1

      Your thinking too small.

      We need to combine our efforts.
      We need to build a monumentally massive tin hat for the world.

      Geeks of the world unite!!

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
    4. Re:Tinfoil hat by Gathers · · Score: 1

      Probarly not, but imagine a Beowulf Cluster of tinfoil hats!

    5. Re:Tinfoil hat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Faker!

      Its thoughts like this that allowed the computer manufacturers to secretly change the cores of microprocessors to copper. Now they can control your mind over the internet!

      Copper does nothing to pschotronic radiation! You can protect your computer with MindGuard (only works if you still have an aluminum CPU), and yourself with lead or aluminum shielding (The website linked is about alien abductions. They're a little kooky, but the technology works well against psychotronic radiation). Since lead is cumbersome and toxic, aluminum is recommended.

  20. Early warning... by SomeGuyFromCA · · Score: 1

    Okay, we've got a little over 24 years warning on this, a bit over 8,850 days by my count. Perhaps we should start assuming this thing is going to hit, and come up with something to do about it. Maybe if we don't turn it away given this much warning, we deserve to get nailed with it.

    (Is this rock in Celestia's data files yet? Maybe we should enter it in and run the clock forward...)

    --
    if the answer isn't violence, neither is your silence / freedom of expression doesn't make it alright
  21. When to Worry by mikejz84 · · Score: 4, Funny

    I would start to worried if astronomers suddenly started to buy a lot of Boeing and Lockheed stock.

    1. Re:When to Worry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No I think the time to worry is when the astromers start spending all their money on drugs, prostitutes and booze (not necessarily in that order).

      -AC

    2. Re:When to Worry by DangerSteel · · Score: 1

      I am WAAAAAYY ahead of those astronomers then ...

  22. No fear.... by wpiman · · Score: 1, Funny

    I just called up Bruce Willis and he said he will take care of it....

  23. How long till we know? by John+Harrison · · Score: 5, Interesting

    How long does it have to be observed before we know whether it will hit or not? Will a year of observation give us certainty? The Torino scale is a bit strange, given the way that it combines chance of impact, time until impact, and severity of impact. I would think that a three dimensional scale would be more useful.

    1. Re:How long till we know? by mikejz84 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Space.com says it will take a few months, unless they use Arecibo's radar--which would really help norrow the orbit.

    2. Re:How long till we know? by j.+andrew+rogers · · Score: 1
      At the distances involved, optical measurements will have much more resolution. Radar loses out on the resolution to optical before you even get to the moon's orbit. More data points are great, but we need higher resolution data than radar can provide at that range.

      Or at least that's what I've been reading from the astronomy folks.

    3. Re:How long till we know? by mikejz84 · · Score: 1

      Apparently the space.com folks don't talk to the astronomy folks.

    4. Re:How long till we know? by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Radar loses out on the resolution to optical before you even get to the moon's orbit.

      However, active radar might give you the exact distance to the object. This could supplement the optical data, which just gives you the direction to the rock at each point in time.

    5. Re:How long till we know? by j.+andrew+rogers · · Score: 1

      It might also relate to the different parameters that a different set of people are interested in e.g. size and rotation rate versus distance. The current margin of error on size is huge and the rotation rate (needed for precise orbits) is anyone's guess.

    6. Re:How long till we know? by Idarubicin · · Score: 3, Interesting
      More data points are great, but we need higher resolution data than radar can provide at that range.

      The key here is that they're not necessarily looking for angular position--which, you're right, they can get much more accurately using a respectable backyard optical telescope. What Aricebo gives is better information on range and radial velocity (from the time for a radar pulse to return, and its Doppler shift, respectively). This information combined with the optical measurements we already have will give us a much better measure of its course than either technique alone.

      --
      ~Idarubicin
    7. Re:How long till we know? by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      Radar also gives you the exact radial velocity.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    8. Re:How long till we know? by Zutroi_Zatatakowsky · · Score: 1
      Space.com says it will take a few months, unless they use Arecibo's radar--which would really help norrow the orbit.


      Too bad Arecibo is already taken for the SETI project. ;)

      --
      All Hail Discordia. Hail Eris. Fnord.
  24. It's the end of the world as we know it. by Aaron+England · · Score: 1

    AND I FEEL FINE...

    1. Re:It's the end of the world as we know it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      birthday party cheese cake jelly bean boom!

      uh and remember it starts with an airplane? oh wait... hmm.

  25. Friday the 13th by waynegoode · · Score: 2, Funny
    According to my Windows OS calendar, it is Friday. What are the odds of that?

    (Uh, 1 in 7, better than the odds of it hitting Earth.)

    1. Re:Friday the 13th by koreaman · · Score: 1

      Wrong. The odds of any particular 13th of the month being a friday is 1 in 7, but the odds of any particular day being Friday the 13th are much less.

    2. Re:Friday the 13th by Billy+the+Mountain · · Score: 2, Informative

      The odds that any asteroid would hit on a Friday the 13 are (roughly) one in 7 * 31 = 217

      BTM

      --
      That was the turning point of my life--I went from negative zero to positive zero.
    3. Re:Friday the 13th by ShelbyCobra · · Score: 1

      Are you talking the odds that it is a Friday, a Friday the 13th, or the odds that your Windows OS Calendar is right?

      --

      -ShelbyCobra

      Living life in the right side of the s-plane

    4. Re:Friday the 13th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The jackoff website in your sig rails against misspellings but the guy wrote 'grammer'... What a wanker!

    5. Re:Friday the 13th by linhux · · Score: 1

      Also see this summary of friday 13th distribution throughout the years: http://x42.com/datelab/

    6. Re:Friday the 13th by pixelpusher220 · · Score: 1

      the odds that Windows got something *right*? why that's...wait for it....

      ASTRONOMICAL!


      Thank you I'm here all weTHUD!


      --
      People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people :-D
    7. Re:Friday the 13th by koreaman · · Score: 1

      It doesn't "rail against misspellings", it rails against misspelling things on purpose. But thank you for the heads-up so I can fix it.

    8. Re:Friday the 13th by JWSmythe · · Score: 2, Informative

      At least some of us aren't on Windows. :)

      user @ amd64 (/user) cal 4 2029
      April 2029
      Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
      1 2 3 4 5 6 7
      8 9 10 11 12 13 14
      15 16 17 18 19 20 21
      22 23 24 25 26 27 28
      29 30

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
  26. Mainstream coverage by mishmash · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Google news's collation of the worldwide media's coverage of this story seams to show that the mainstream serious media is ignoring this story.

    1. Re:Mainstream coverage by SpaceLifeForm · · Score: 5, Funny
      Well of course. Until they figure out a way to make some money off of it.

      Asteroid insurance anyone?

      --
      You are being MICROattacked, from various angles, in a SOFT manner.
    2. Re:Mainstream coverage by saden1 · · Score: 1

      No worries mate. We'll make first contact with the Vulcans long before then and they will come to our aid.

      --

      -----
      One is born into aristocracy, but mediocrity can only be achieved through hard work.
    3. Re:Mainstream coverage by saden1 · · Score: 1

      Oh snap. We don't make first contact until 2063. We are so f*ing doomed.

      --

      -----
      One is born into aristocracy, but mediocrity can only be achieved through hard work.
    4. Re:Mainstream coverage by banz23 · · Score: 1

      Offer Asteroid insurance, if it doesn't hit then its pure profit, if it does hit then life as we know it is over and we are either dead or money is meaningless! This greatly increases your upside, but your downside remains the same.

  27. 1 miss is good by Sporkinum · · Score: 2, Informative

    If it misses the first time, it has 40 more chances to hit. The good news is that the other chances are substantially less than the first.

    --
    "He's lost in a 'floyd hole"
    1. Re:1 miss is good by tindur · · Score: 1

      Especially if it didn't miss the first time.

  28. When can we know where it would hit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seems like an interesting opportunity in real-estate futures.

  29. Strange questions.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Ok, we now know the probability of the object hitting the earth. What is the possibility of the object hitting the moon?

    What impact will the earth have if the object hits the moon?

    1. Re:Strange questions.... by alop · · Score: 1

      life on earth would cease without the moon, it acts as a gravitational counter-weight keeping the earth's rotation fairly constant. without it, the earth would rotate wildly

      --
      --alop
    2. Re:Strange questions.... by Jeffrey+Baker · · Score: 2, Informative

      DOOM! GLOOM! Oh, except a 390m asteroid would not destroy the moon, or even necessarily alter its orbit (much). The moon has a mass of 7.35E22 kg! It is a very large rock.

    3. Re:Strange questions.... by dustinbarbour · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Though you are correct, I don't think an asteroid of this size would obliterate the moon. As such, life on Earth would remain largely unaffected I should think. If we were lucky and it hit the bright side of the moon, we may no longer have the so-called "Man in the Moon", but that would be a small price to pay to see such a terrific impact on a body so close to Earth.

    4. Re:Strange questions.... by east+coast · · Score: 1

      life on earth would cease without the moon

      Mwhahahah! Sweet!

      Err... I mean that's terrible.... terrible....

      --
      Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
    5. Re:Strange questions.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      The moon would remain in its course. I take it you noticed all those craters in the moon's surface? yeah... if those didn't obliterate the moon, this sure won't either.

      And I REALLY hope it hits the moon, it would be an awesome sight.

      Really, what are the odds of a moon impact? I want to know too.

    6. Re:Strange questions.... by mfarver · · Score: 1

      There is a fairly entertaining Sci-Fi book: "Thunderstrike" by Michael McCollum where a giant earth killing comet is instead directed to crash into the moon.

      Something to think about, given the Moon's low gravity, and lack of atmosphere, how much of the ejecta ends up crashing into earth anyway?

    7. Re:Strange questions.... by myukew · · Score: 1

      I don't think so. Rather it would form a nice ring...

    8. Re:Strange questions.... by thorndt · · Score: 1

      I read (the other day) that the chance of the asteroid hitting the moon is ZERO--something to do with it being on the other side of the earth then or somesuch.

      --
      - The race is not [always] to the swift, nor the battle to the strong. -
    9. Re:Strange questions.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Possibility of the object to hit the moon: 0.

      Asteroid - - - - -Us - - - - -The Moon

      ----o->-----------0-------------o

      At the time of the impact.

    10. Re:Strange questions.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, I've seen the applet in the website too, the moon is almost exactly behind the earth at the time of impact.
      Doesn't this mean that the earth's gravity would most likely pull the asteroid towards the moon IF it doesn't hit us first?
      As I see it, the moon is in the worst spot possible to avoid getting hit!

      I REALLY doubt the odds of a moon impact are zero, unless any of you actually did the calculations?

    11. Re:Strange questions.... by weeboo0104 · · Score: 1

      we may no longer have the so-called "Man in the Moon",

      The Man in the Moon would look less like Ralph Cramden and more like Goatse.

      --
      It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men. -Frederick Douglass
    12. Re:Strange questions.... by chakalaka · · Score: 1

      While it would be better than the object hitting the Earth, it Would Not Be Good for the object to hit the moon. The moon has a relatively low escape velocity, and a portion of the ejecta resulting from the impact would end up drifting, sailing, and in some cases screaming like buckshot towards the Earth.

      Of course, in space, nobody hears buckshot scream.

    13. Re:Strange questions.... by quantum+bit · · Score: 1

      What impact will the earth have if the object hits the moon?

      Free tacos for everyone?

    14. Re:Strange questions.... by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      ZERO.

      The moon is on the other side of the earth/moon system at that point in time.

      S .... m .... E ...............__a

      Somthing like this. Mnemonics are up to be figured by the reader.

      angel'o'sphere

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    15. Re:Strange questions.... by Vicsun · · Score: 1

      I don't know if anyone has beat me to it yet, but the probability of that would be zero. At the time of impact the moon will be on the other side of the planet.

    16. Re:Strange questions.... by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1
      Grrrrrr.

      In case you see not my parent, my answer was: ZERO as moon is not in the trajectory.

      ECODE tag has eaten my CR.
      ^
      | direction of orbits and asteroid trajectory

      S ____ m ___ E

      ____________ a
      angel'o'sphere
      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    17. Re:Strange questions.... by RabidStoat · · Score: 1

      and you're watching this from where exactly ? Call me a sentimental old fool, but I'd rather see this thing as a fuzzy dot passing by at a healthy distance.

    18. Re:Strange questions.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know about impact, but of course if the asteroid happens to go between moon and earth, the moon will split in half, take some of earths atmosphere with it and life on earth will mutate in the strangest ways. Naturally.

    19. Re:Strange questions.... by BigBossBert · · Score: 1

      If my back on envelop calculations are correct, the moon receives 10^16 joules of sunlight every second. The impact would generate some 5*10^18 joules (impact energy is less on moon than earth, because of the lower gravity). So even if only 1% of energy is emitted as visible light, the blast should outshine the full moon and should be easily visible even in the daytime.

    20. Re:Strange questions.... by curious.corn · · Score: 1

      Isn't the exponent of the gaussian density squared? Percentiles are the integral of the density and omitting the square law makes a hell of a difference on definition range, mean, variance and even the existence of a definite integral... Check your numbers before deluding countless /.ers... ;-)

      --
      Mi domando chi à il mandante di tutte le cazzate che faccio - Altan
    21. Re:Strange questions.... by OgGreeb · · Score: 1

      I believe you mean the Earth-facing side of the Moon. The "bright side" changes as the Moon rotates.

      --
      -- Gary Goldberg KA3ZYW 301/249-6501 AIM:OgGreeb Digital Marketing Inc., Bowie, MD //www.digimark.net/
  30. I can only wonder by adolfojp · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I can only wonder how high that percentage has to go before we start making plans on how to avoid the posible impact.

    Sadly, in the end it will all come down to politics. The president (any president of any country with enough power to do something about this) will want to have certainty before taking the risk of being labeled the greatest hero or the greatest fool in history. And I am not even taking international politics into account.

    I guess that it all depends on how high we value life itself.

    Cheers,
    Adolfo

    1. Re:I can only wonder by at_18 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I can only wonder how high that percentage has to go before we start making plans on how to avoid the posible impact.

      To 100%, of course. Now that the asteroid is closely monitored, the orbit can be measured with sufficient precision in a few more weeks or months of observations.

      Given that the predicted hit is in 2029, waiting two or three months will not be fatal.

    2. Re:I can only wonder by nwbvt · · Score: 1

      It won't hit for nearly a quarter of a century. I cannot get to the article (/.ed) but I would suspect that would mean it is pretty far away. Thus there wouldn't be much we can do for some time. But I'm sure the pentagon already has a number of contingency plans already written up and filed away somewhere next to the plans for what to do if Djibouti gets the bomb and threatens to nuke Luxembourg.

      --
      Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
    3. Re:I can only wonder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Labeled in what history?...

    4. Re:I can only wonder by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What I wonder about the current orbit is the following.

      Does the asteroid come close to impacting earth on multiple occasions in the run up to this, or is the coming from a single large orbit to hit us?

      Any spacecraft sent to intercept it will have a tough time landing on this if its heading straight for us, it will need immense amounts of fuel to do a uturn in space.

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
    5. Re:I can only wonder by learn+fast · · Score: 1

      Asteroids are the least of our problems. At least we can all agree the problem even exists, and put objective probabilities and costs on it. Least of all, there is no one out there that I can think of who could profit from its denial until it's too late.

    6. Re:I can only wonder by cmowire · · Score: 5, Insightful

      See, I think that there's a difference and a gift in disguise here.

      The reason why we don't have a system to deflect asteroids right now is because asteroids are one of those things that "could happen" in the far off future.

      It's like smoking. It's not guaranteed to kill you, and nobody drops dead after a single puff. Some smokers live really long lives. So smoking is viewed as something that's "bad for you", not an instant death sentence.

      Therefore, we've got a lot of people who smoke in the world.

      However, pulling out a shotgun, pointing it at your face, and pulling the trigger is unquestionably lethal.

      Therefore, the only people who do that are people who really want to die.

      The difference is that we don't always think about things that *might* cause harm, but we always think about things that *will* cause harm.

      This is just one of the many ways that the human brain is a little screwed up about risk management. It worked when we were on the plains of Africa and needed to evade predators and manage to survive, but it doesn't necessarily hold up now.

      Now, the blessing in disguize is that a quarter century is very much long enough to figure out what to do. Remember, we've got more than enough knowlege to do it -- computers to plot trajectories, a variety of tested and untested propulsion and power systems, techniques, etc. In the quarter of a century timespan, we may just need to paint one side white to provide the push. So, in some sense, it's even easier than trying to go from nothing to the moon landing.

      But what we lack, like most things in space, is a feeling of urgency to really do something about it. Thus, this is a blessing in disguize. If they give it a decent possibility of really hitting Earth, 25 years in the future, we've got time to do something about it in ways that if they said that it'll probably hit tomorrow we won't.

      Same way I know several folk who, when their doctors told them that they were going to be dead in x years if they didn't quit smoking, were able to go cold turkey.

    7. Re:I can only wonder by Fishstick · · Score: 1

      c'mon that is easily solved by slingshotting around the moon at 9 g's or something.

      'course, that assumes that the object happens to be coming at us from _exactly_ the right angle to coincide with a lunar slingshot...

      oh, and you will have to modify two space shuttles to be able to carry enough fuel for a lunar trajectory...

      oh, and they will have to refuel at some orbiting space station that happens to carry a large supply of liquid oxygen for no apparent reason (plenty of oxidizer, you need to bring the propellant yourself, though)

      oh, and... nevermind

      --

      There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
      Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.

    8. Re:I can only wonder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The president (any president of any country with enough power to do something about this) will want to have certainty before taking the risk of being labeled the greatest hero or the greatest fool in history.

      Nah. Just tell him that you think there is a possibility that some evidence might be interpreted to indicate that there may be Muslim extremists involved.

    9. Re:I can only wonder by ArbitraryConstant · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I agree, but I think substantial action will only be taken if a country wealthy enough to do something about it will be hit or affected significantly. If it's going to hit, say, in the south atlantic, the US, the EU, China and Russia (the only ones that could possibly do something about it) will say "Meh, let's just ride this one out.". The resulting tsunami wouldn't do that much damage given a quarter century to prepare, at least not to anyone with money to do something about it.

      --
      I rarely criticize things I don't care about.
    10. Re:I can only wonder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At 20+ years out, I don't care what the percentage is. I want to know the uncertainty on the percentage. Give me 70% +- %5 and I'll worry, but 50% +- 50% doesn't seem worth talking about.

    11. Re:I can only wonder by Fishstick · · Score: 1

      > I would suspect that would mean it is pretty far away.

      can't see the article either, but would not assume the rock is coming at us in a straight line over the next 25 years.

      more likely it is on some eliptical orbit that may cross earth's orbit now and again, with a potential impact when earth and this asteroid's orbits intersect.

      in that kind of situation, a possible solution might be to change the time at which it crosses the earth's orbital path by speeding it up or slowing it down (rather than trying to change its orbit or blowing it up)?

      that seems a little more likely to me that this object is in an eccentric orbit around the sun that will bring it dangerously close to us instead of just some big rock that is passing through our solarsystem heading straight for us.

      --

      There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
      Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.

    12. Re:I can only wonder by platypus · · Score: 1

      Well, given reaction on global warming, which has a much higher probability to considerably impact the lifes of millions of people in roughly the same timespan, it might be interesting compare.
      Ok, we don't need to stop driving obscenly oversized cars to avoid this catastrophy.

    13. Re:I can only wonder by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      > in that kind of situation, a possible solution
      > might be to change the time at which it crosses
      > the earth's orbital path by speeding it up or
      > slowing it down (rather than trying to change
      > its orbit or blowing it up)?

      "Speeding it up or slowing it down" _is_ changing its orbit.

      > that seems a little more likely to me that this
      > object is in an eccentric orbit around the sun
      > that will bring it dangerously close to us

      Yes, of course that is what it is. The way to deal with it is to change its momenetum very slightly when it is at a point in its orbit far from Earth. Any sufficiently large change will do, but of course there is an optimum direction in which to add momentum that will require the least effort.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    14. Re:I can only wonder by nwbvt · · Score: 1
      " in that kind of situation, a possible solution might be to change the time at which it crosses the earth's orbital path by speeding it up or slowing it down (rather than trying to change its orbit or blowing it up)?"

      Is that really something we want to do before we know exactly what its orbit is (and whether or not it will for certain hit us)? What if we were safe from the origional orbit, but the altered one would crash into us even sooner? This still seems to be something that we would need to wait on rather than act on with incomplete information as the origional poster suggested.

      --
      Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
    15. Re:I can only wonder by nwbvt · · Score: 0

      Really? Global warming has a greater than 1 in 37 chance of occuring? Exactly what do you believe the chances are that global warming will happen anyways? Furthermore, I would like to know how you are estimating the chances that the effects of an unproven hypothesis will occur in the first place.

      --
      Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
    16. Re:I can only wonder by jlapier · · Score: 1

      The president (any president of any country with enough power to do something about this) will want to have certainty before taking the risk of being labeled the greatest hero or the greatest fool in history. And I am not even taking international politics into account.

      Fear not! In the year 2029, Emperor Bush will decimate that freedom-hating asteroid!

    17. Re:I can only wonder by Fishstick · · Score: 1

      >"Speeding it up or slowing it down" _is_ changing its orbit.

      yes of course you're right -- when I think "change its orbit" in this context, I guess I was thinking about the difference between trying to 'divert' the object by changing its path/vector vs avoiding a collision by affecting the time it crosses earth's path by changing its velocity.

      --

      There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
      Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.

    18. Re:I can only wonder by at_18 · · Score: 1

      This asteroid has an orbit that takes him close to Earth from time to time.

      This page from nasa lists the close calls from 2029 on (apparently before 2029 the asteroid is passing far enough that it's not a threat).

    19. Re:I can only wonder by Fishstick · · Score: 1

      well, obviously I wasn't suggesting that we start monkeying with the thing before we know what is going on, I was responding to the idea that we can't do anything for a long time because it is 25 years away.

      my contention is that the thing is probably on an eccentric orbit that brings it inside the earth's orbital path, probably at least a couple times before the predicted near miss.

      if this is the case, certainly we would have a chance to observe and refine the predicted path of this object and decide if there is any case for attempting to alter its orbit so it misses that time and any in the future.

      --

      There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
      Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.

    20. Re:I can only wonder by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      This site says the asteroid is projected to strike in India or the Indian ocean.
      I would guess that the governments of the world would find it more economical to just move the many millions of people that could be affected rather than try to alter the course of the asteroid.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    21. Re:I can only wonder by aminorex · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Since global warming has already been observed, I'd say the chances are about 1 in 1.

      More interesting is whether a methane burp from clathrates will result in a cascade leading to a global extinction event during your lifetime.

      --
      -I like my women like I like my tea: green-
    22. Re:I can only wonder by mangu · · Score: 1
      "the human brain is a little screwed up about risk management"


      You can say that again, that's why some people want to legislate nuclear power out of existence, and at the same time complain about safety belt and motorcycle helmet laws...

    23. Re:I can only wonder by platypus · · Score: 1

      The probability of global warming - as another poster has already written - is 1. But that's not what I wrote, you might want to reread what I said.
      There's a plethora of possible consequences predicted from it, and nearly nobody denies that some of these will indeed occur (we can also observe some of them today). Each of these will impact more people than this asteroid, the question is how.
      See for instance http://www.gcrio.org/CONSEQUENCES/summer95/agricul ture.html
      or other articles on that page.

    24. Re:I can only wonder by nwbvt · · Score: 0
      " Since global warming has already been observed, I'd say the chances are about 1 in 1."

      Watching "The Day After Tomorrow" doesn't count as observing global warming. In reality, it has not been observed, and many of the predicitons early versions of the theory made have simply not panned out. It is an unproven theory at best. That doesn't mean it won't happen, but certainly doesn't mean that it is guarenteed to happen either.

      --
      Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
    25. Re:I can only wonder by nwbvt · · Score: 1
      "The probability of global warming - as another poster has already written - is 1. "

      And as I pointed out to him, no its not.

      "we can also observe some of them today"

      Really? Like what? Cite specific examples.

      Nothing in your posts points to the probability that anything will happen, nor gives insight in how the probabilities that consequences from a hypothesis will occur can be calculated.

      --
      Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
  31. HA! by jrwillis · · Score: 4, Funny

    1 in 37? Who'd be dumb enough to worry with odds like that?! Now excuse me, I need to go buy a lottery ticket for this week.

    --
    Keep Austin Weird!
    1. Re:HA! by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

      1 in 37? Who'd be dumb enough to worry with odds like that?!

      This from someone who suggests voting libertarian.

  32. OMG by ikkonoishi · · Score: 2, Funny

    Uh oh. We slashdotted nasa.

    I think that might be a federal crime!

  33. keeps getting worse? by alop · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Did anyone notice that a few years after the 2.7 probability pass, there is a 9.4 impact probability. that seems to be more noteworthy

    --
    --alop
    1. Re:keeps getting worse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      9.7e-07, not 9.7e-02. I take it you failed high school chemistry?

    2. Re:keeps getting worse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yeah, I did notice the 9.4.

      I also noticed the e-7. ;-)

    3. Re:keeps getting worse? by Frodo+Looijaard · · Score: 1

      Don't know where you are looking, but on the impact page for 2004 MN4 the only thing with 9.4 in it is a 9.4e-07 chance in 2032. But that is only a 0.00094% chance. Mind the exponent :-)

  34. 2 Interesting Conjectures by iamlucky13 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    The server's name is apparently Neo. Can it save us? I doubt it since it already took the red pill.

    Someone will surely correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure by the name that this is the 16 foot (5 m) rock that passed inside the moons orbit last week. That's large enough, if I remember correctly, to hit the ground if it doesn't break up, but too small to do anything more than very localized damage. If someone really wants to get Karma points, they'll post a link to the asteroid simulator page so we can all go throw a 16 foot rock at the earth and find out how much the climate is affected.

    1. Re:2 Interesting Conjectures by MrP-(at+work) · · Score: 2, Informative

      I think this one is about 1000 feet across, not the 16 foot one mentioned the other day

      --
      [an error occurred while processing this directive]
    2. Re:2 Interesting Conjectures by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      It's not the same rock. This one is 800 meters across, not 5.

      Blatant karma whoring: impact simulator link.

    3. Re:2 Interesting Conjectures by pediddle · · Score: 1

      This rock is 400 meters across. If this is the same 5m rock I'd ask it where it bought its viagra!

    4. Re:2 Interesting Conjectures by Ayaress · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm pretty sure this isn't the one. This is 1,300 feet, not 16.

      And the server's name is NEO standing for Near Earth Object.

    5. Re:2 Interesting Conjectures by Gogo+Dodo · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      It's the Near Earth Object Program. Gee, wonder why the server is called neo.

    6. Re:2 Interesting Conjectures by kf6auf · · Score: 1

      First of all, you will be wanting to throw a 390 meter diameter rock at the earth. As for the asteroid simulator pages there are several:
      Arizona Site - I prefer this one for its data.
      UMD Site - I like the nifty pictures.

      I would also like to point out that this asteroid has decreased in size from 440 meters in diameter to 390 meters in diameter. So let's hope that as the probability goes up, that size will go down. Similarly, the energy has dropped to 1,500 megatons of TNT (after atmospheric losses). Also, the atmosphere will cause it to break up (starting at 50 km up) into smaller fragments that will shower a 1.25 km by 0.88 km area. This is not significantly dispersed to prevent a crater from forming so expect a 5 km diameter crater (0.5 km deep) followed by a 6.7 magnitude seismic result. Don't expect much ejecta 100 km away or more and don't expect too much of an air blast/noise. Don't worry too much, something this big hits earth every 35,000 years on average.

      It'll be interesting to see if insurance companies keep the phrase "objects falling from sky" in the list of insured accidents.

    7. Re:2 Interesting Conjectures by linear_shift · · Score: 1

      Ah, glad someone mentioned that. *Whew* thought all of /. was drunk or something to that effect. Cut down on the bloody alchol /.'ers! :D

      --

      Nos una. Nos unique. Nos victum.

    8. Re:2 Interesting Conjectures by Progman3K · · Score: 1

      These are the numbers I used.
      I'm not sure how close that is to the rock we're talking about, but if it is anywhere close to it, it'll be quite a mess...
      Not a planet-killer, but even if it falls 100 KMs from a populated area, people will be burned by the air-blast.

      Distance from Impact: 100.00 km = 62.10 miles
      Projectile Diameter: 800.00 m = 2624.00 ft = 0.50 miles
      Projectile Density: 8000 kg/m3
      Impact Velocity: 17.00 km/s = 10.56 miles/s
      Impact Angle: 45 degrees
      Target Density: 2500 kg/m3
      Target Type: Sedimentary Rock

      I predict it'll just disintegrate until it's no bigger than a small dog's head.

      --
      I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
  35. I can tell... by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

    ...this is going to generate a lot of Slashdot stories over the next 25 years!

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  36. I really appreciate your sig line more by way2trivial · · Score: 5, Funny

    due to your EXCELLENT math skills.

    --
    every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
    1. Re:I really appreciate your sig line more by JonGaudette · · Score: 1

      That, my friends, is what what Texans call "Fuzzy Math".

    2. Re:I really appreciate your sig line more by fucksl4shd0t · · Score: 1

      At least he's not the guy who's sig says "As a matter of fact, I AM a rocket scientist!"

      --
      Like what I said? You might like my music
  37. So what happens if reaches 100%? by earthforce_1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It will be intereresting to see what happens on the political front, if it is eventually determined that this thing will hit earth.

    At 300m across, it is small enough to be nuked out of harm's way. And fortunately, we still have a lot of time on our side to plan and fly a mission to blast it to rubble, or at least into a different trajectory. But this would mean at least temporarily revoking some treaties regarding nuclear detonations in space. And how will the bill be divided up? What happens if is eventually determined that this thing will land in central Asia or Africa - will unaffected countries still be willing to pick up the tab?

    Looks like we will need to develop some sort of (funded) international contingency plan to deal with dangers from space, even if it is eventually determined this particular rock will miss us.

    --
    My rights don't need management.
    1. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by way2trivial · · Score: 3, Insightful
      at 300m across, it can be moved without a nuke

      gosh, maybe even just a little 'love tap'

      delta V is a function of how hard you smack it, and from how far away..

      --
      every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
    2. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Something tells me that, if this thing were to hit, there'd be no "unaffected" countries, only non-obliterated countries.

    3. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by Elkboy · · Score: 1

      I know one nation that already spends billions of dollars on trying to shoot stuff out of the sky, although for no good right now. Seems like a good start to me.

      Although, you never know if the leaders of that nation consider an asteroid impact to be the next biblical calamity. Last time it was water, this time it's rock. A big, quick rock.

    4. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by mikejz84 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I think the US should pay to take care of this little problem. It may cost a trillion dollars, but it is well worth another 50 years of being able to rub the rest of the world in the fact that we saved their asses. (again)

    5. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, my donkey would be lost without you.

    6. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But this would mean at least temporarily revoking some treaties regarding nuclear detonations in space.

      I think the world will give us a pass on the treaties if we blow up that rock.

    7. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe they'll take some of that money and spend it on shelters for all the right thinking folk and leave the moonbats up on the surface to fend for themselves?

    8. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      STFU you ungrateful Limey bastard.

    9. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by helioquake · · Score: 1

      Can it be broken into pieces by nuking it?

      I doubt that very much. If one just detonate it on the surface, it'd simply make a molten crater on the surface (remember, there is no blast wave as there is no air; the detonation of a thermonuclear device will generate a copiuos amount of radiation that photo-ionizes the surface of a rock). There has to be some penetrating mechanism to sink the nuke into the rock deeply and then detonate. But even then, there is no guarantee that it would break into smaller pieces (and even if you can do that, then you're creating a smaller pieces that falls all over the earth, like a shotgun blast, instead of a cannon blast).

    10. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by HermDog · · Score: 1

      Yes, but what about the Romulans?

      --
      JADBP
    11. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by Patik · · Score: 1
      What happens if is eventually determined that this thing will land in central Asia or Africa - will unaffected countries still be willing to pick up the tab?
      It's a sad reflection of our society when we have to wonder if rich countries will spend some money to prevent millions (billions?) of deaths in a poor country.
    12. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by JohnPerkins · · Score: 1

      "...some sort of (funded) international contingency plan to deal with dangers from space..."

      What, you don't think this already exists? Just because no one's admitted to it...yet.

    13. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, it is important to fly probes to it in the meantime since it's sweeping 'tween the orbit of Venus and a wee bit past Earth's.

      We need to know what it's made of, how strong it is (i.e. will we need big f**king hefty bags to hold a huge pile of gravel) so that we can learn whether we should be mining it or just trying to drop it's aphelion to somewhere within earth's orbit (and the best place to apply deltaV is at perihelion, down near Venus' orbit.

      Of course... arranging for an impact on Venus would likely be, well, entertaining.

      The problem is that SOMEONE needs to start spending money to build a spaceborne infrastructure NOW. Whoever makes that kind of investment can certainly make a mint given the ability to exploit the resources...

    14. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by rhsanborn · · Score: 1

      I think the result of such an impact would be far more widespread than simply a disaster for the poor countries that it does or does not hit. According to their estimates, this thing would hit earth with the energy equivalent to 1500 megatons of TNT or about 100,000 Hiroshima bombs. Thats a pretty significant impact.

    15. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe the system to nuke incoming asteroids exists, but it probably failed all its tests but was deployed anyway, as a campaign favor to the aerospace/defense industry.

    16. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by nizo · · Score: 1

      I wonder if it could be (safely) bumped into a close enough orbit around earth to be useful? Or maybe move it into one of the LaGrange(sp?) points (slowing it down might be kinda hard). It might make a nifty little space station, or be worth mining?

    17. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by LetterRip · · Score: 1

      [QUOTE] delta V is a function of how hard you smack it, and from how far away.. [/QUOTE]

      Isn't delta v, change in velocity? It doesn't matter from how far away you smack it as far as delta v is concerned, however, an equivalent change in velocity from a greater distance from earth is more significant, because it will have much more time to travel along the new trajectory and thus be more likely to miss the earth with an equivalent applied force.

      LetterRip

    18. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      Best bet isn't to break it up- best bet is to leave it whole and detonate EARLY enough to get that very small change in vector that is needed to change the probability back to 1/300...or better yet one in infinity. Of course the problem with that is apparently you just put it off for another 24 years until you have to do it again....

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    19. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by helioquake · · Score: 1

      I am thinking of the actual number.

      Detonating a nuke in space isn't very effective when it comes to generating "pressure". At least 1/2 of the energy will be lost in form of radiation (a geometrical effect). Photons do carry momentum but I wonder how many nukes would it take to add a lateral velocity of 1 km/s (or more or less, it all depends on when we do it -- the earlier the better, like you say). For an cubic asteroid with 300 x 300 x 300m in size, it's roughly 5e7 Newtons of the force requied to add 1km/s velocity. Now that's a hell of the force.

    20. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      Constant or gradual? Seems to me that there's more than one way to do this. Use your first nuke to blow a crater into the asteroid. Use successive nukes at the bottom of the crater to shape the radiation itself- after all, even gamma and alpha particles have some mass, if very slight.

      But given your total, that's 15,239,192 Joules, give or take a bit, needed. From the conversion factors at http://www.ieer.org/clssroom/unitconv.html that's only .00362837541924 tons of TNT. In other words, one Tsar Bomba at 50 tons of TNT would yeild 13780 times as much energy as needed, or given your 50% conversion factor, 6890 km/s to the asteroid. Given that the earth is ONLY ~13,000 km wide, all you need to do is hit this less than a week before collision with just such a nuke- in such a way that sends it out of the plane of the eliptic, preferably.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    21. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by swillden · · Score: 1

      Of course... arranging for an impact on Venus would likely be, well, entertaining.

      Until it pissed of the Venusians and they decided to blast Earth with their Super Death Ray.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    22. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by JohnPerkins · · Score: 1

      Wish I still had the Bloom County book...Giant Laser Space Frisbees lost out to Milo's plan to surround the Earth with a protective barrier of money.

    23. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      first off, if thise thing hit the most densly populate place on the planet, the death toll might hit 8 figures.
      Yeah, thats bad, but lets not start ramping the panic up to the point where people think billions would die.

      It seems these days people don't want are help or advice. I am pretty sure if the US started ramping up the technology to help prevent these kinds of disasters every other country would have a hissy fit.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    24. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by helioquake · · Score: 3, Informative

      First, my apology that I made an error in the previous post. The actual energy requied to move a 300m cube (with density of 3 g/cm3) laterally at 1km/s is about 4e16 joules (I shamefully admit that I forgot about SI unit).

      Now let's fix up some bad concepts here. First, a detonation of a hydrogen bomb will provide impulse force, neither constant or gradual. Second, there is no mass in gamma ray (it's a photon). Alpha particles will be produced but it's insignificant compared to the asteriod, so we can omit them out of our consideration.

      Now taking your number (thanks by the way), 1 mega ton TNT is about 4e15 joules. And like I said, a half of radiation just simply escapes away from the asteroid. Now suppose if the efficiency of radiative momenta is 100% (which is very unlikely, but let's assume that), then it would take 20 mega-ton TNTs at a minimum to give it a little push.

      But again, the 100% efficiency is unlikely. Some photons will part its energy into heat, or re-radiated away. So for the safety factor, I'd feel confident if we are to deploy about 10x, or 200 mega-ton TNTs simultaneously.

      It's not an impossible number, perhaps.

      (ps. I ignore many physics here; the asteroid is bounded by the Sun's gravity and so its potential field must be taken into account as well..well, I will worry about that when NASA comes knocking my door for help).

    25. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by mmurphy000 · · Score: 1

      Sounds like a lovely use for an Orion drive.

    26. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by HermDog · · Score: 1

      It's made of oil or WMDs.

      (That should take care of it.)

      --
      JADBP
    27. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by FleaPlus · · Score: 1

      Looks like we will need to develop some sort of (funded) international contingency plan to deal with dangers from space, even if it is eventually determined this particular rock will miss us.

      Check out this congressional statement by former Brigadier General Simon "Pete" Worden on the topic of detecting and mitigating the threat of Near Earth Objects. Coincidentally, he's also in the running to become the next NASA Administrator, although he's been somewhat critical of NASA and the large aerospace contractors in the past.

      Essentially, international cooperation would be great for the actual detection of asteroids -- you want all the eyes you can get. However, when it comes to actually diverting an asteroid, an effort by a single large country would probably be better than trying to cobble together some sort of International Coalition to Divert the Asteroid. The actual financial cost probably wouldn't be too great, although it'd probably make use of some weapons tech which a country wouldn't want to share with others.

    28. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      That's still only 4 cobalt warheads- IIRC the average ICBM can carry 6, add some extra BDB (Big Dumb Boosters) to get it into the proper orbit- and it isn't impossible at all to place 300 megatons of TNT on target.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    29. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      They better be pretty darned big. Your best time to hit it is when it is farthest from Earth, and that appears from my reading to be about 0.92 AUs.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    30. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by helioquake · · Score: 1

      I have no idea what cobalt warheads are [but I know enough on how a hydrogen bomb works...]. Anyway I'm not saying that it cannot be done with nukes. Maybe we can send several probes to diagnose its composition (carbon rich or iron rich, or any ice?), then determine its rotational axis (if you misplace the bombs, it might just let it spin faster, you see?), and examine geometric anomaly to see where to place and detonate bombs in concert. It'll take some precision engineering to place everything, but we have done that with a NEO probe before. From engineering perspective, this can be done (not fail-safe, but...).

      Whether it is the SMARTEST thing to do is up for debate. I'd be more interested in investing the use of a solar sail (Japan's ISAS/JAXA is the only institution that has done some engineering test on such sail, though).

    31. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If It landed in Africa or some poor country other countries may help evacuate the projected area of impact of people, then fund money to rebuild the infrastructure. That may be more cheaper than nuking it out the sky or changing its trajectory if it hits a poor nation. If it hit a country with a large amount of infrastructure it will probably be cheaper to nuke it out of the sky...

      It all comes down to economics, not politics.

    32. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      I agree- I'd be interested in the Solar Sail if for no other reason than it's development in the next 24 years or so could give us OTHER big positives (like the eventual colonization of the solar system in about 200 years). This could be just the thing we need to jump start investment in this area.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    33. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      > I wonder if it could be (safely) bumped into a
      > close enough orbit around earth to be useful?

      That would require much, much, much, much more energy than would biffing it just enough to make it miss Earth.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    34. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      > I doubt that very much. If one just detonate it
      > on the surface, it'd simply make a molten crater
      > on the surface...

      It's most likely that these things are collections of loose stuff stuck together rather than solid rocks. Even the stony ones are probably fractured. Thus your bomb would be likely to bust it into an unknown number of pieces some of which would still have a chance of hitting Earth.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    35. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      Detonating a nuke essentially in contact with the object would vaporize a substantial amount of mass from the object. The vaporized material would expand away from the object, imparting substantial momentum to it.

      Unfortunately, it would probably also break it up in an unpredictable fashion.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    36. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      > first off, if thise thing hit the most densly
      > populate place on the planet, the death toll
      > might hit 8 figures.

      That _might_ be possible given the worst possible ocean strike and no warning. However, the exact target is going to be public knowledge years in advance.

      > I am pretty sure if the US started ramping up
      > the technology to help prevent these kinds of
      > disasters every other country would have a
      > hissy fit.

      Nonsense.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    37. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by helioquake · · Score: 1

      Think a bit about where that "momentum" in the vaporized material originally come from. Then the conservation of momentum.

      You are probably right about one thing: tensile strength of an asteroid is not certain. If it's pure iron, sure, blow it off the course. But nothing is that pure. Most probably admixture of chondrite and iron. That means it'll be like to cause fissures and to break it apart if not bomb it carefully (that's why I said we need to check geometrical anomaly).

      That's one of the reasons that I do not think nuking is the prudent choice.

    38. Re:So what happens if reaches 100%? by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      > However, when it comes to actually diverting an
      > asteroid, an effort by a single large country
      > would probably be better than trying to cobble
      > together some sort of International Coalition to
      > Divert the Asteroid.

      Better yet would be independent efforts by several large countries. Redundancy is good.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  38. HELP!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Somebody call Bruce Willis!!!

    1. Re:HELP!!! by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1
      Somebody call Bruce Willis

      My copy of the script says "Wake the president"

      Why is he always sleeping when anything important happens?

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    2. Re:HELP!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I dunno ... I think that it's safer that W. is asleep.

    3. Re:HELP!!! by CrackedButter · · Score: 1

      He isn't, he's in a school with children reading books perfectly suitable for a man of his abilites.

  39. Anti-matter weapons? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    better than nuclear ones

    1. Re:Anti-matter weapons? by LWolenczak · · Score: 1

      Well, can we have anti-matter for my faster then light starship? I'd like to just leave the solar system.... or just fly very very fast.

    2. Re:Anti-matter weapons? by Santana · · Score: 1
      --
      The best way to predict the future is to invent it
  40. Not an ELE by frankie · · Score: 1

    MN4 is pretty small as asteroids go. Expected impact energy is 1.48 gigatons, which would suck for anyone in a few hundred km, but the rest of us are pretty safe.

    1. Re:Not an ELE by shaitand · · Score: 1

      unless it hits water

  41. "May you live in interesting times" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    From article summary: Interesting times, indeed.

    "May you live in interesting times"! Aha! I get it! It's a clever ancient Chinese proverb with a double-meaning!

    Wait - no it isn't.

    Brought to you by the Slashdot FactCheck 2004 coalition - preventing inaccuracy before it starts!

  42. NASA Spoiled My Headline! by HangingChad · · Score: 0
    And unless the governments of earth pay me 100 beeelion dollars I will allow my asteroid to destroy all life on this planet while I watch from the safety of my e-vil space station.

    Muahahahahahahaha!

    MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

    And, Number 2, make a note to shoot everyone at NASA for giving away my e-vil plan before I took over the satellite TV system and announced it myself. I'll teach those meddling bastards.

    Well, that's lunch everyone.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
  43. It's time by kungfuSiR · · Score: 1

    I think it's about time that the governments of the world start to work together to address the threat of an asteroid colliding with earth, instead of focusing on killing one another. Somehow i see this type of thing going ignored for too long, until it is too late to actually do anything about it Even if this asteroid does not hit earth, it should be a wake up call that the probability of such an occurance is higher then most people think

    --
    I love to deploy my packages
    1. Re:It's time by Tackhead · · Score: 1
      > I think it's about time that the governments of the world start to work together to address the threat of an asteroid colliding with earth, instead of focusing on killing one another.

      False dichotomy.

      Starlog April 13, 2019: With ten years to go, we have arrived asteroid 2004MN4 and are ready to land the nuclear reactor that will power the ion engine thrusters.

      Starlog April 14, 2019: Engines firmly secured to the rock and now active, we're prepared to burn the last of our fuel supply to put us on a transfer orbit that will take us back to Earth.

      Starlog April 15, 2019: We placed four ion engines on the sunlit side of 2004MN4. Yet my first officer has just reported sighting six blue glowy things in a crater on the dark side of the asteroid. Must be imagining things.

      April 12, 2029: North Korean People's Daily News headline reads "PWN3D!"

  44. One in 37 by Tackhead · · Score: 1
    > 1 in 37? Who'd be dumb enough to worry with odds like that?! Now excuse me, I need to go buy a lottery ticket for this week.

    Bah!

    I'm betting $100 on the roulette wheel. $50 on black. $50 on red. I should be able to play forever, because hey, what are the odds I'll ever lose?

    1. Re:One in 37 by bluenirve · · Score: 1

      Is there one 0 or two?

    2. Re:One in 37 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it's American roulette, your odds of losing are 1 in 19. This is exactly what the green 0 and 00 slots on the wheel are designed to foil. They represent the house's edge.

    3. Re:One in 37 by Viking+Coder · · Score: 4, Informative

      1 in 37! Nice. =)

      (Roulette has 18 black, 18 red, and 1 green for those not in the know.)

      --
      Education is the silver bullet.
    4. Re:One in 37 by Tackhead · · Score: 1
      > Is there one 0 or two?

      "Yes".

      (The only time I played roulette was in Europe. There's one "0" in Europe, but two - "0 and 00" - in USA.)

    5. Re:One in 37 by JustinXB · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I thought two green? A double zero and a zero?

    6. Re:One in 37 by TheSpunkyEnigma · · Score: 1

      Europe is 1, us Americans get screwed with 2

    7. Re:One in 37 by JustinXB · · Score: 1

      Europe also thinks pinball is a game of chance instead of a game of skill. Screw Europe.

    8. Re:One in 37 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most US roulette wheels have a zero and a double zero, as casinos here apparently didn't think routlette was enough of a sucker's bet already or something. Most roulette wheels in European casinos have only a single green zero, which is a significant advantage for the player- I happened to be at a casino (American) a week ago, and watched as green numbers came up three times in a row, making a number of people very sad. A rare event even with two greens, but obviously much more so for a wheel with one.

    9. Re:One in 37 by david+duncan+scott · · Score: 1

      Actually, I think they're 1 in 37 -- I believe 0 is neither black nor red (1 in 38 in Vegas, where they have a 00 as well.)

      --

      This next song is very sad. Please clap along. -- Robin Zander

    10. Re:One in 37 by TheCabal · · Score: 3, Interesting

      American roulette wheels have 2 greens. There are a few tables here in Vegas that have single green, and the smart roulette player (oxymoron) will take a few minutes to find that table. Most of the big Strip casinos don't carry them, or may have one, tucked away somewhere. The off-Strip casinos are a bit more open with their roulette wheels, or placement of low-minimum blackjack tables (try finding a $5 table at one of the big Strip casinos after 5PM).

    11. Re:One in 37 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Europe thinks that he doesn't like generalizing.

    12. Re:One in 37 by Derek+Pomery · · Score: 1

      Generalisations aside, once upon a time pinball *was* a game of chance.
      http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a1_3 11.html
      well, mostly chance.

      --
      -- perl -e'print pack"H*","6e656d6f406d38792e6f7267"' /. ate my old sig. Bastards.
    13. Re:One in 37 by AxelBoldt · · Score: 1
      Most roulette wheels in European casinos have only a single green zero, which is a significant advantage for the player

      Actually, it's even better than that: if you bet on red in European roulette and zero comes, they don't take your money away; they place it "on hold". If red comes next, you get your money back, otherwise it's gone for good. Of course, if you play a non-zero number, there's no such advantage, and all the money is gone when zero comes.

    14. Re:One in 37 by JustinXB · · Score: 1

      What really is needed to make a pinball machine a pinball machine? Some would argue it was when flippers would added. Others simply do not care.

  45. This is a good thing by CodeWheeney · · Score: 2, Funny

    No we don't have to worry about systems with time_t defined as a 32bit signed int rolling over in 2038.

    --
    C8H10N4O2 | Developer > Code
  46. No worry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    We will have all killed each other by then, anyway.

    This does bring up an interesting issue, though. What if humans knew 20 years in advance that there was a near 100% chance of complete obliteration by an asteriod? (Yes, I know it would be unlikely to know with such certainty, but that's not the point.) How exactly would society react?

    I'm sure many would panic, even though the event was 20 years out, maybe some would commit suicide eventually, and a lot of brain power would be directed towards preventing this disaster. But how would things like personal relationships, international relations, and everyday life and social norms be affected? For example, would people be looked down upon for bringing children into this world? Would warring nations of people put aside their differences and work together or just continue on as usual?

    Obviously a lot of questions, none of which I know the answers to. Just trying to trigger some more interesting thoughts and discussion than, "Oh my God, we're all going to die!"

    1. Re:No worry by randallpowell · · Score: 0

      People would panic but try to find a solution. Fundamentalist Christian would want it to hit since it may be the Rapture they want so badly. As far as social attitudes, it would change at first, people would hate and blame gays, pagans, left-handed folks, but they would calm down and see it as it is...a chance encounter with a rock from outer space.

    2. Re:No worry by dreamer-of-rules · · Score: 1
      Well, I sure wouldn't give a *bleep* about buying a Prius. And I might stop recycling.

      OTOH, how many times in the past has anyone been right about predicting the end of the world. My money's on the prediction being wrong, no matter how "scientific", and the world (and humans) surviving.

      If I'm wrong, you're welcome to collect your winnings.

      --
      Everyone is entitled to his own opinions, but not his own facts.
  47. 1 in 37? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Damn... I know guys who have placed single number bets on roulette and won. I guess I will know in a year or two whether I need a pension plan or not.

    Bummer... :(

  48. Sound betting advice by nizo · · Score: 4, Funny

    If you ever get a chance to bet on an asteroid wiping out humanity, make sure you bet that it won't; otherwise even if you win you can't collect.

    1. Re:Sound betting advice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course, there is no way to collect if it doesn't, since it could potentially wipe out humanity tomorrow.

    2. Re:Sound betting advice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm an alien, you insensitive clod!

  49. Form 1040-MN4 by ScentCone · · Score: 2, Funny

    So, that's a 97.29% chance that you'll still have to file your taxes two days later.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    1. Re:Form 1040-MN4 by madshot · · Score: 1

      and a 100% chance that I'm going to file exempt in 2028 just incase I don't have to file on 4/14/2029 :)

      --
      Obama = Socialism.
  50. Crash by pete-classic · · Score: 4, Funny

    And I thought the last crash of '29 was depressing.

    -Peter

  51. Hard times to laxative bussiness. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    regards.

  52. Odds of Friday the 13th by waynegoode · · Score: 1
    Yes. I meant given that the date is known, it is a 1/7 chance of being Friday. Not knowing that, the odds are 1/213 (12/7/365.25).

    Now, just for fun, what are the odds that the odds for a day beign Friday the 13th end in 13?

    1. Re:Odds of Friday the 13th by fucksl4shd0t · · Score: 1

      Dude, nobody likes a smart-ass.

      *a mob of physicists murders waynegoode

      --
      Like what I said? You might like my music
    2. Re:Odds of Friday the 13th by Rasta+Prefect · · Score: 1

      There are 100 two digit combinations, so 1/100.

      --
      Why?
    3. Re:Odds of Friday the 13th by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude.. fucksl4shd0t is my password!

    4. Re:Odds of Friday the 13th by X1011 · · Score: 1

      Not knowing that, the odds are 1/213 (12/7/365.25).
      No, that's probablilty. The odds would be 1:212 (1:212.0625 if you want to be accurate).

    5. Re:Odds of Friday the 13th by yellowstone · · Score: 1
      what are the odds that the odds for a day beign Friday the 13th end in 13?
      There are 100 two digit combinations, so 1/100.
      Actually, the correct answer is either 100% (the answer does end in '13') or 0% (the answer does not end in '13'). Of course, it all depends on how you express the probability, what base you choose, etc, etc.
      --
      150 Opening BINARY mode data connection for slashdot.sig (129323052 bytes).
    6. Re:Odds of Friday the 13th by Rasta+Prefect · · Score: 1
      Actually, the correct answer is either 100% (the answer does end in '13') or 0% (the answer does not end in '13'). Of course, it all depends on how you express the probability, what base you choose, etc, etc.


      Assuming no particular knowledge of the outcome, there's a one in a hundred chance. (Assuming, of course the traditional base 10).

      The "100%" or "0%" approach is silly because it doesn't actually _get_ you anywhere. You could argue in the same way that the roll of a die has a 100% or 0% chance of being a six and you'll just have to roll it to find out which. It is true in a pedantically truthful way, but totally fails to deal with the uncertainty created by your ignorance of the exact make up of hand, die, table, etc. in any sort of a useful manner.

      --
      Why?
    7. Re:Odds of Friday the 13th by yellowstone · · Score: 1
      The "100%" or "0%" approach is silly because it doesn't actually _get_ you anywhere. You could argue in the same way that the roll of a die has a 100% or 0% chance of being a six and you'll just have to roll it to find out which.
      No, it's not the same. I roll a six-sided die, there are six possible outcomes. The original poster wondered
      Now, just for fun, what are the odds that the odds for a day beign Friday the 13th end in 13?
      The probability that a randomly selected date happens to fall on the 13th day of the month, and on a Friday, is a fixed constant. The answer is not random, and it's not going to change. Pick your way to express the probability. Either it ends with '13', or it doesn't.
      --
      150 Opening BINARY mode data connection for slashdot.sig (129323052 bytes).
  53. Zero by WalksOnDirt · · Score: 1

    I think the odds are very close to zero. If further analysis show the asteroid striking Earth, I think by 2029 we'll be able to change its orbit to miss.

    --
    a,e,i,o,u and sometimes w and y (at be if of up cwm by)
  54. unix 32bit time_t size, who care now ? by La+Gris · · Score: 1

    As a Unix geek I will not have to care of Tue Jan 19 03:14:07 2038 (UTC/GMT) anymore.

    32bit time_t size should be just enough to run until April 13, 2029.

    --
    Léa Gris
  55. A thought on blowing it up with a warhead by Gudlyf · · Score: 1

    Many people assume that, should this asteroid need to be destroyed, we'd do so with a nuke of some sort. If we did that, and all the bits of the rock came raining down to the Earth, wouldn't that mean we could potentially litter the planet with radioactive rock?

    --
    Trolls lurk everywhere. Mod them down.
    1. Re:A thought on blowing it up with a warhead by Control+Group · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The bigger problem is net energy.

      If all we do is break it up, but don't generate a miss, there will still be an impact. The kinetic energy of the collision is based on mass and velocity, which the asteroid would still have virtually all of. If it can be converted into enough pieces, the surface area might be increased to a point where each piece burns up in the atmosphere (I doubt the real possibility of this, but I'll go with it as a thought experiment) - but that would still deposit all that kinetic energy into our system, it would just be as therms in the atmosphere rather than shockwaves through the ground. I have no idea what suddenly dumping something on the order of thousands of megatons of energy into the atmosphere would actually do, but I can't imagine it would be all that good from our point of view.

      --

      Reality has a conservative bias: it conserves mass, energy, momentum...
    2. Re:A thought on blowing it up with a warhead by Zocalo · · Score: 2, Informative

      This isn't Hollywood, it's highly unlikely we would actually consider blowing it into little pieces. What is far more likely is that we'd try and give the thing a series of small taps at strategic points in its orbit to deflect it. Also, you'd more likely want to try and nudge an object not so much into a different orbit, but to change the angle of inclination. If the orrbit is changed to that it is mostly above or or below the plane of Earth's orbit and passes through it at a safe distance from the actual orbit, then the risk is permanently removed.

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    3. Re:A thought on blowing it up with a warhead by Chyeld · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ok, how else do you plan on getting a League of Super Friends formed? Think people, THINK!

      In reality, I would hope whatever plan they would use would break it into small enough pieces that the majority would burn up in the atmosphere.

    4. Re:A thought on blowing it up with a warhead by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes, some, possibly. But keep in mind that a decent-sized nuclear blast should be enough to fully vaporise that rock. Most of the vapor will be dispersed over a WIDE area (just how wide depends entirely upon how far away it is from Earth when destroyed). And most of that vapor will have a trajectory significantly altered from the original path of the asteroid, and will miss Earth entirely. The real key is to hit it when it's well away from Earth, and preferrably well away from the Earth's orbital plane.

      --
      You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
    5. Re:A thought on blowing it up with a warhead by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      > But keep in mind that a decent-sized nuclear
      > blast should be enough to fully vaporise that
      > rock.

      Sigh. Will you people please sit down and do some calculations before posting such nonsense?

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    6. Re:A thought on blowing it up with a warhead by sandwiches · · Score: 1

      Regardless of how much people say that a nuclear blast would not be advisable because the same amount of matter would hit the earth with the same energy, I'm still not convinced.
      If you blew up the asteroid, two things would happen:
      1) The bits from the asteroids would have a significantly different vector from the original asteroid.
      2) Dispersing the same amount of matter over a larger area DOES NOT have the same destructive effect as concentrating it in one spot.

      Now, to expand on these ideas:
      Assuming we hit the asteroid directly in front of its trajectory, several pieces of the asteroid will fly out back directly opposite from the asteroid original path, some will go sideways or at different angles, and even the ones that are still heading toward earth will have a significantly reduced speed and trajectory. So, less of the asteroid will actually make it to earth, some of it will make it but much later, other will bounce off the atmosphere, and the rest will hit much slower.

      Here's the analogy for #2:
      You have a 400 people standing in a square and you drop a 1-ton block of lead on a random area from 20 feet. At least one or two people will probably die. Now, if you drop one ton worth of tiny lead balls over all 400 people from 20 feet, most likely no one will die even though it may hurt to have little lead balls pelting you on your head for a few seconds.

      Also, no one seems to consider the destructive power of our atmosphere. One large asteroid can pass through the atmosphere and cause great damage despite some burn up during entry. Breaking up the asteroid into thousands of little rocks will increase the area of the asteroid and therefore burn up a larger portion of it upon entry into our atmospehere.

  56. it sure will by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it has already generated SIX!

  57. Everyone just needs to file Exempt in 2028. by madshot · · Score: 2, Funny

    I think I'm going to claim exempt for 2028.. because their is a 1 and 37 chance that I won't have to pay up.

    --
    Obama = Socialism.
    1. Re:Everyone just needs to file Exempt in 2028. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And if you do have to pay up you'll have to pay huge penalties (well, besides the fact that you can't claim exempt if you paid any money the previous year, the most you can claim is 10).

  58. What time of day? by ch-chuck · · Score: 2, Funny

    I hope it's after noon - I have an important 10 o'clock meeting that morning.

    --
    try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
    1. Re:What time of day? by cperciva · · Score: 1

      I hope it's after noon - I have an important 10 o'clock meeting that morning.

      In that case, you're safe (unless you live in some part of the world operating on UTC - 1200). The possible impact time is approximately 9:30 PM UTC.

    2. Re:What time of day? by MagPulse · · Score: 1

      Dude if your company makes you plan your meetings out 25 years in advance you should think about a career change.

  59. News Just In: by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 1

    Stocks of Boeing and Lockheed today rose 20 points.
    The FTSE index says the rises came after a sudden wave of visitors from the online cult site "slashdot".

    --
    liqbase :: faster than paper
  60. Now we know what the asteroid is thinking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    KILL (kill kill kill) NOW (now now now)

    (...asteroid knife comes out from behind camera...)

    SCREACH!!! SCREACH!!! SCREACH!!!

    IT'S JASON!!! NOOOOOO!!! BLOOD EVERYWHERE!!! ARRRGGGHHHHH!!!

    ----

    (various uncapitalized letters to get around lameness filter)

  61. Easy enough to destroy...or is it??? by FerretFrottage · · Score: 1

    Just the damn thing Osama.

    Seriously, there's got to be 2+ star general in the USAF air space wing that would love to try testing a nuke on this thing. Of course given the success of our past missile defense tests, one could have doubts, but I suspect that at least this target is bigger than a barn door.

    --
    "Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a fat white guy who is threatened by change."
  62. Chain asteroid by iMaple · · Score: 5, Funny

    How long do we have to wait for this

    Hi
    I am Prince Okabaoakauu of of the microbial strain found on Asteroid Mn4. We control the motion of our asteroid and can divert it safely if the earthlings wish so. However we are not sure if the earthlings(a.k.a. you) want a collision or not. Hence to help us decide , please forward this mail to 12 people within 1 hour of receiving the mail if you do not want a collision. You will also get a free mobile phone and 2 Ipods. If you do NOT immediately forward this email we will assume that you want the collision.
    Thanks

    I JUST RECVD THIS MAIL, PLS FWD IT TO ALL UR FRIENDS

    1. Re:Chain asteroid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hi I am the wife of Prince Okabaoakauu of the microbial strain found on Asteroid Mn4. My Husband recently died in a coup attempt by the earthlings who were tired of chain mail. He left 354 million microbedouchemarks, or $54 million USD. I need to get it off the asteroid. If you would please send me your bank account number I would be happy to share it with you. Please hurry- we've only got 24 years before the nuke goes off. Princess Okabaoakauu...thanks....

  63. The explanation... by mangu · · Score: 1

    There's a guy in Texas, an oil driller, who once helped deflect an asteroid which was going to hit Earth. His name is O'Donnell, but people call him "Odds". After his job in the asteroid, he became known as "Asteroid Odds". He has a very small penis, people say it's only one inch long, but the girls say he can keep it up all night. Isn't that perfectly clear?

  64. the chances of the site being slashdotted by lifes+a+cluster · · Score: 1

    And the chances that NASA's NEO server will be slashdotted has been confirmed at 100% :)

  65. We should all be thanking our Gods... by HotNeedleOfInquiry · · Score: 2, Funny

    That there's not a Beowulf cluster of these things on the way.

    --
    "Eve of Destruction", it's not just for old hippies anymore...
  66. Odds by andyrut · · Score: 1

    I like how the title of this document is "What are the odds of dying?" ... as if they weren't 1:1 odds.

    1. Re:Odds by AxelBoldt · · Score: 1

      The chances of dying are 1 in 1; the odds of dying are therefore 1 to 0.

  67. Interesting - flying decreases the odds... by thrill12 · · Score: 1

    ...of getting hit considerably I guess.

    I wonder whether I can book a ticket for a 24 hour airplane trip for April 13th of 2029 ahead now....

    If so, I could probably pay by putting a dollar into a bank account now, and wait till interest helps it along...

    --
    Slashdot: stuff for news, nerds that matter, matter for news, stuff that nerd
    1. Re:Interesting - flying decreases the odds... by X1011 · · Score: 1

      Yea, and assuming you can get 5% interest, you will have a whole $3.27 to buy the ticket!

    2. Re:Interesting - flying decreases the odds... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Er, isn't that a little like running in the rain to get less wet?

    3. Re:Interesting - flying decreases the odds... by lachlan76 · · Score: 1

      Of course, there may not be a place to land, and all the dust in the air could stop the engines.

  68. My life, the universe, everything culminating. by OrthodonticJake · · Score: 1

    It will be my 42nd year. (cringe)

    --
    I regularly report MSN spam to the Hotmail admins.
  69. A giant crash Air Bag for Earth? by stkpogo · · Score: 1

    At least redirect it into the Moon so we can watch the fireworks;-)

    -Moonstruck-

  70. Start Small by ChrisF79 · · Score: 1

    Fix your grammar before you go creating big weapons. I think we'll use, "that travel faster than the spead of light" instead of your version.

    --
    Finance tutorials and more! Understandfinance
    1. Re:Start Small by nadadogg · · Score: 1

      Fix your grammar before you go creating big weapons. I think we'll use, "that travel faster than the spead of light" instead of your version Nope, faster then is better. I mean, everyone knows that when you go past the speed of light, you can go into the past. PS, it's "speed", not "spead"

      --
      i use linux and windows oh god how can i have an opinion
  71. Another link and Impact Effects Calculator! by iamlucky13 · · Score: 4, Informative
    I found another article discussing the asteroid that isn't slashdotted. Even more interesting though is the Impact Effects Calculator

    I ran it through the calculator for a 400 meter asteroid (from the article) made of dense rock (assumed) at 17 km/s and 45 degree impact (suggested by the calculator). I also dropped it in 1000 m of water, as it has a 75% chance of landing in the oceans.

    Results
    • Impact Energy: 1.23 x 10^19 Joules
    • Crater Formed in Seafloor: 2.46 km diameter
    • Earthquake: 6.0 on Richter Scale
    • Radiant Flux at 100 km: 7.68 times that of sun
    Numbers should, of course, be taken with a grain of salt
    1. Re:Another link and Impact Effects Calculator! by firew0lfz · · Score: 1

      I was just looking at that article, and was playing around with the numbers too...


      I was wondering more about the image presented in the article here that showed the objects orbit and Earth's. It seems to me that this thing will pass very close by the orbit of Venus, which makes me wonder - do astronomer's also include the possible pull of Venus' gravity on this astroid as they do the calculations of the astroid's orbit? I assume so, but I was wondering how exactly do that factor that in?

      --
      Try not to let life get in the way of living.
    2. Re:Another link and Impact Effects Calculator! by kf6auf · · Score: 1

      It helps to use 12.59 km/s as the impact velocity instead of 17. Seismic effects drop to 5.8 on Richter Scale when this velocity is used.

      The serious damage will happen if it hits land. The atmosphere will cause it to break up (starting at 50 km up) into smaller fragments that will shower a 1.25 km by 0.88 km area. This is not significantly dispersed to prevent a crater from forming so expect a 5 km diameter crater (0.5 km deep) followed by a 6.7 magnitude seismic result (noticibly worse than if it hits water). Don't expect much ejecta 100 km away or more and don't expect too much of an air blast/noise.

      I would also like to point out that this asteroid has decreased in size from 440 meters in diameter to 390 meters in diameter. So let's hope that as the probability goes up, that size will go down. As a result, the energy has dropped to 1,500 megatons of TNT. Don't worry too much, something this big hits earth every 35,000 years on average.

    3. Re:Another link and Impact Effects Calculator! by iamlucky13 · · Score: 1

      That's a very interesting picture. I expected a very eccentric orbit with a long period. That shows an orbit not dramatically different from the earth's, and it must have a similar period. That means it would cross our path quite a few times before that next close approach. For Venus however, I doubt they astronomers could draw that up, discuss it for however long they've been watching the rock, and still neglect to figure in close approaches to the ladies' planet.

    4. Re:Another link and Impact Effects Calculator! by Zocalo · · Score: 2, Informative
      From the Slashdotted article, the asteroid has a velocity of 12.59km/s and a diameter of 390m, which lessen things a little:
      • Impact Energy: 6.62 x 10e18 Joules (1.5GT - dead on the data given by JPL!)
      • Crater Formed in Seafloor: 2.63km
      • Earthquake: 5.8 on Richter Scale
      • The object is moving to slowly to generate a significant fireball.
      I'd assume that the larger crater size is down to the slower speed means rhat less of the mass is vaporised by heat on the way through the atmosphere. So, less damage than yesterday's earthquake due to ground tremors, but the Tsunamis generated by the impact are going to be *much* worse; the crater opened in the water has a diameter of 6.92km which is one hell of big wave.
      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    5. Re:Another link and Impact Effects Calculator! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree, we should blow up Venus and then its gravitational pull won't put the Earth in harm's way.

      Heck, the planetary fragments will form a nice shield (kinda like Phaeton's remains between Mars and Jupiter).

    6. Re:Another link and Impact Effects Calculator! by ayjay29 · · Score: 1

      >>>I found another article [space.com] discussing the asteroid that isn't slashdotted.

      The asteroid that isn't slashdotted?

      That's the answer, its obvious, just slashdot the asteroid into oblivion.

      --
      Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated up.
    7. Re:Another link and Impact Effects Calculator! by geekoid · · Score: 1

      "Numbers should, of course, be taken with a grain of salt"

      yeah...especially 3. I've never trusted 3. looks like someone mooning me.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    8. Re:Another link and Impact Effects Calculator! by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1

      found another article discussing the asteroid that isn't slashdotted.

      Asteroids can be slashdotted? Hmm... that's a new one.
      *goes down and changes his save-the-earth-from-the-asteroid plans*

  72. The probability *should* rise before falling by da+cog · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just because the probability keeps going up, it doesn't mean that we are getting increasingly sure that the asteroid will hit Earth. Suppose that the asteroid were going to come close to Earth without hitting it. At first, the impact probability would appear low since the "window" of orbits allowed from the data would be wide. As we got better observations, however, this window would shrink, but the Earth would stay inside it since it's near the center. Thus, for a time the probability of impact would go up, since the Earth would take up a greater percentage of the window. Eventually, though, the window would shrink past the Earth and the probability would go down again.

    I suspect that this is what will happen. Could easily be wrong, though.

    --
    Snarkiness is inversely proportional to wisdom because it emphasizes feeling right rather than being right.
    1. Re:The probability *should* rise before falling by Fuzzums · · Score: 2, Insightful

      the other possibility is it will go up all the way to... 1-in-1

      --
      Privacy is terrorism.
    2. Re:The probability *should* rise before falling by n6mod · · Score: 2, Informative

      Which is has, apparently since this posting.

      I finally got back in to NASA, and MN4 is now a Torino 0 object, with the 2029 event gone entirely.

      --
      You have violated Robot's Rules of Order and will be asked to leave the future immediately.
    3. Re:The probability *should* rise before falling by AxelBoldt · · Score: 1
      Just because the probability keeps going up, it doesn't mean that we are getting increasingly sure that the asteroid will hit Earth.

      That's exactly what it means: we are getting increasingly sure that the asteroid will hit Earth. In the sense that NASA would be willing to accept bets with odds of 36 to 1 right now (as opposed to odds of 232 to 1 just two days ago).

      You are right that we are pretty sure (about 97% sure) that our estimated probability will eventually drop down to zero; and nobody has any idea how likely it is that the probability will rise first before falling to zero.

    4. Re:The probability *should* rise before falling by NereusRen · · Score: 1

      Just because the probability keeps going up, it doesn't mean that we are getting increasingly sure that the asteroid will hit Earth.

      Perhaps you should have thought that one through before posting it. In fact, that is exactly what it means. That's why it's the probability.

      You are assuming that, within the "window" of possible trajectories, all paths have equal probability. A better assumption would be that it is closer to a bell-shaped distribution, where it is more likely to take the path that they predict, with less probability when the path deviates farther.

      In that case, as the "window" shrinks with more accurate projections, the Earth also moves towards the edge of the window, resulting in a lower probability even though the overall probability window is denser due to its smaller size.

      You are right that we might see this kind of scenario even with a normal probability distribution if the earth is very close to the actual path of the asteroid, but not right on top of it. But we'd see the same sort of increasing probabilities if the Earth IS in the path of the asteroid. So, to say that we should not worry about an increasing probability for the asteroid to hit out planet is a statistical misconception. I'm not sure how your post got modded up so high. (oh wait...)

  73. I for one... by SmokeHalo · · Score: 0

    ...will welcome our new asteroid overlords.

    --
    I'm not good in groups. It's difficult to work in a group when you're omnipotent. - Q
  74. Well Since We're /.ing the site... by firew0lfz · · Score: 5, Informative

    Crazy, I was just checking my bookmark on this when the slashdot article popped up. Anyways..

    Here is the wikipedia page explaining the Torino Scale. I still wouldn't worry about it until the thing hit at least a 8 or so. The article gives a nice explanation of what astronomers would do in warning the governments in the event they thought this thing deserved any real attention.

    Torino Scale
    --
    Try not to let life get in the way of living.
    1. Re:Well Since We're /.ing the site... by Bodhammer · · Score: 1

      I checked out the Torino Scale as well here: Torino and I'm pretty sure that these guys will be able to solve the problem!

      --
      "I say we take off, nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
    2. Re:Well Since We're /.ing the site... by Captain+Nitpick · · Score: 1
      Here is the wikipedia page explaining the Torino Scale. I still wouldn't worry about it until the thing hit at least a 8 or so.

      Unfortunately, you didn't read the page correctly. I can't really blame you for that because the scale's a little wacky.

      The Torino Scale combines both kinetic energy and probability of impact. This asteroid will never be an 8 on the scale because it's too big. The only possible values for it are 1,2,4,5, and 9. A rough reading says that it'll hit 5 when the probability goes to around 10%. It'll only hit 9 when impact is a virtual certainty (>99%).

      If it's at 5 in 2025, I wouldn't put down money on a house located in whatever probable impact zone they've calculated by then.

      --
      But then again, I could be wrong.
    3. Re:Well Since We're /.ing the site... by megabunny · · Score: 1
      And . . .

      thats it, probability 0.000018 now. Torino=0.

      Somebody pointed a big telescope at it I suppose.

      MB

      --
      I am a viral sig. Please copy me and help me spread. Thank you.
  75. Re: Real Estate by TarrVetus · · Score: 1

    Seems like an interesting opportunity in real-estate futures.

    Only if you mean these real estate futures.

  76. What a View! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm just imagining vacationing to whichever side of the earth this thing is going to be on in 2029, and watching it pass narrowly by. That's going to be an incredible site. And, if it -does- hit the earth, at least I'll be quickly vaporised.

  77. The End of the World by chammel · · Score: 1

    Revelation 8:1-13 And when he had opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven about the space of half an hour. And I saw the seven angels which stood before God; and to them were given seven trumpets. And another angel came and stood at the altar, having a golden censer; and there was given unto him much incense, that he should offer [it] with the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar which was before the throne. And the smoke of the incense, [which came] with the prayers of the saints, ascended up before God out of the angel's hand. And the angel took the censer, and filled it with fire of the altar, and cast [it] into the earth: and there were voices, and thunderings, and lightnings, and an earthquake. And the seven angels which had the seven trumpets prepared themselves to sound. The first angel sounded, and there followed hail and fire mingled with blood, and they were cast upon the earth: and the third part of trees was burnt up, and all green grass was burnt up. And the second angel sounded, and as it were a great mountain burning with fire was cast into the sea: and the third part of the sea became blood; And the third part of the creatures which were in the sea, and had life, died; and the third part of the ships were destroyed. And the third angel sounded, and there fell a great star from heaven, burning as it were a lamp, and it fell upon the third part of the rivers, and upon the fountains of waters; And the name of the star is called Wormwood: and the third part of the waters became wormwood; and many men died of the waters, because they were made bitter. And the fourth angel sounded, and the third part of the sun was smitten, and the third part of the moon, and the third part of the stars; so as the third part of them was darkened, and the day shone not for a third part of it, and the night likewise. And I beheld, and heard an angel flying through the midst of heaven, saying with a loud voice, Woe, woe, woe, to the inhabiters of the earth by reason of the other voices of the trumpet of the three angels, which are yet to sound!

    --
    Neutrons are slippery little rascals, they can fool you. They can bounce and show up around corners you don't expect.
  78. Skylab incident in India by mahesh_gharat · · Score: 1

    I was a kid when the NASA predicted that Skylab will crash in India (Year 1979).
    People from my town started spending money and cursing US fearing they will be dead after the crash. Within a week most of the people were financially broke.
    Later, Skylab crashed into Pacific. It took a long for those people to recover.
    In 2029, I predict Credit Card companies will do overwhelming business.

    1. Re:Skylab incident in India by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not the fault of the United States that there are a lot of stupid people in your town. Of course like everyone else in the world, you always find ways to place blame on the US for anything. I bet you think Ronald Reagan personally caused the Bhopal disaster, right?

    2. Re:Skylab incident in India by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it didn't, it dropped on us here in Australia. We even had a well-known electronics entrepreneur offer 'SkyLab Insurance' for $20 million coverage.
      Why don't the yanks drop their space junk on their OWN country???!!

    3. Re:Skylab incident in India by mahesh_gharat · · Score: 1

      If you don't know where to crash land your satellites, then don't launch them.
      What will be the US Govt. and US people reaction if ISRO predicts the crash landing of on of our satellites on your land?
      Think over it.

      It's not Ronald Regan but Warren Anderson, is the one we are looking for, who is fugitive and hiding in US.
      Check Wikipedia and clear you doubts about the Bhopal disaster.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal_Disaster

      I was not blaming anybody, I was telling the facts.

  79. Re:as long as no BLUE STATE is hit.... by randallpowell · · Score: 0

    We need farmers to make food...oh wait we import that now. Well, if it does hit a red state, they can only blame Bush. It was found on his watch anyways.

  80. Buggblatter Beast of Traal by desertfish · · Score: 1

    I wonder how many fatal asteroids have nearly missed the earth before we had the technology to see them.

  81. the leaders ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... of this nation are her citizens. We'll examine the facts, and then each State will direct its national representatives to take action.

    If we see that the thing is going to hit here, we'll just take care of it, like we did to fascism and totalitarianism, and are doing right now to terrorism.

    If you don't believe that we can do, have done, and will do these things, you are deluded.

    1. Re:the leaders ... by RabidStoat · · Score: 1

      .. Earth to Anonymous Coward come in please your time is up and you need to take your medication.

  82. Rocket Upper Stage? by LakeSolon · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I don't see the original author having posted it yet, so here's a link to an interesting theory regarding the possibility that what we're looking at is in fact just the upper stage of a rocket launched some time ago.

    ~Lake

    1. Re:Rocket Upper Stage? by JustinCredible · · Score: 1

      or maybe there is a bug on the telescope.

  83. How much closer? by erroneus · · Score: 1

    I wonder how much closer things have to be before our very existance becomes at least as important as keeping our neighbors hungry and out shareholders happy?

  84. Close enough by ChTh · · Score: 1

    That's it. I'm out of here.

  85. The last one: by Dano+Watt · · Score: 1

    And there will still be some guy going "FIRST POST!" then BAM

  86. Inching up is to be expected by xihr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Keep in mind that the very nature of the situation will result in the probability slowly creeping upward until (hopefully of course), it is eliminated entirely. The very nature of having a low-probability situation whose likelihood has to be determined with continued measurements to increase the precision of the prediction means that as the likely set of paths is refined, the cylinder that represents the likely set of paths of the asteroid shrinks. Because it shrinks, the probability that it will be at any given point in that cylinder goes up.

    At the point when the cylinder is projected to miss Earth entirely, the probability of impact will suddenly go to (very near) zero. In other words, the very nature of the situation regarding refining the data we have means that the probability will creep slowly upward before it goes to zero. (This happens for all close encounters, of course; it's just that no one's watching the actual probabilities for those too carefully.)

    So the steady rise of the impact probability may be disquieting, but it is not unexpected and does not actually indicate anything particularly additionally troubling going on.

    1. Re:Inching up is to be expected by LMCBoy · · Score: 1

      Your analysis assumes that the probability density is uniform throughout the cross-section of the cylinder of likely paths. In reality, there is a most likely path where the probability density peaks, and the probability falls off as you deviate from that most-likely path.

      So, if the Earth is currently near the edge of the cylinder of likely paths, then as the orbit is refined, the probability density at Earth will decrease, not increase. This will be the case fo the majority of potential Earth-crossing events (just because if you choose a location at random within the cylinder cross-section, it will probably not be near the probability peak).

      --
      Liberal (adj.): Free from bigotry; open to progress; tolerant of others.
    2. Re:Inching up is to be expected by xihr · · Score: 1

      Sure, but that's well on the way to when the probabilty is being ruled out. The point is the probability steadily increases, and then once the probability distribution shrinks to the point that the Earth moves out of the highest risk area, it very rapidly decreases to zero.

      What you say is ideally true but what you're not considering is that the orbit refinement is not a continuous process, it's a discrete process. There are a finite number of observations and these help refine the orbit. It's very likely that each successive batch of observations will increase the probability until one batch refines it so that impact is many sigmas out, and then the probability jumps to zero.

      Which is, of course, exactly what happened. It's Torino 0 now. Troll, indeed!

  87. Sun's Gonna Burn Out by mslinux · · Score: 1

    Let's look at the big picture. Whether this rock slams into earth or not, the sun is going to use up all of its fuel someday. Either way, the earth will not exist as we know it forever.

    Have a good day!

  88. Interesting? by Jugalator · · Score: 1

    Interesting times, indeed.

    Yeah, that's surely a geek-optimistic way to look at it. :-S

    --
    Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  89. I made a movie of the possible 2004 MN4 encounter by E-Lad · · Score: 1

    Here is a movie I just made (3ivx 4.5, 528KB) of the possible orbital dance that Earth and 2004 MN4 may have in April - May 2029.

    I made this video using the 2004 MN4 orbital data from the NASA NEO site. The program I used, Starry Night, doesn't take into account things such as gravitational attraction, but it's a reasonable view showing just how close we'll be to 2004 MN4 when it comes around in 2029

  90. Hmm... by Sheepdot · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    ...at the rate these bumps have been going; by April 13th 2029, Slashdot will be reporting a 3876/3877 chance of the asteroid hitting Earth with an estimated 9 out of every 10 stories having to deal with collisions with Near-Earth Objects.

    Excuse me if insinuate that this story is starting to get old now. As is the topic itself. Those that want to know are following the story themselves now.

    IMHO, this is a cleverly disguised appeal for more funding, and I don't mind getting modded down for telling it as I see it.

  91. Moving people by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 1
    Ok, so let me ask a big question here. If this thing IS going to hit, we're going to have plenty of warning right? So what are our options realistically (I don't know if Bruce Willis will be up to it by the time this comes to pass).

    I mean, I'm sure people smarter than myself will be able to figure out where its going to hit and when, so would we be able to safely evacuate these areas to eliminate most if not all casualties? Would shooting a nuke at this thing be a serious option? Or would something like that just cause it to fragment and cause even more damage? What about shooting rockets at it that attach to the asteroid and continuously fire their rockets to push it off its current course?

    --
    Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
  92. There is already proven anti-asteroid technology! by bani · · Score: 1

    ...In fact, it's been around since 1979!

    I wonder how long it will take NASA to start building the little triangle ships?

    As long as those tiny UFOs don't show up, we should be safe.

  93. Whatever you do by Hyksos · · Score: 2, Funny

    Don't Panic

  94. The next X-Prize by kevinx · · Score: 2, Funny

    it can be the next X-Prize. First one to destroy the rock wins.

    On a lighter note.. So, what do you think will kill us first, this asteroid or global warming?

  95. Since the planet will be destroyed at noon by night_flyer · · Score: 1

    it will be a day of morning

    --


    Thanks to file sharing, I purchase more CDs
    Thanks to the RIAA, I buy them used...
  96. Meanwhile... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Odds of increased coverage of this silly story have increased to 100%.

  97. calamity from the skies by Technetium+Web · · Score: 1

    Only death awaits you all, but do not fear. For is it through death that a new spirit energy is born. Soon, you will live again as a part of me. *summons ultimate destructive black magic meteor*

    --
    www.TECHNETIUM.net.au
  98. Pinging the meteorite meters? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    4 on the Torino scale and 1.10 on the Palermo scale. Yikes.

    Is this the first NEO to get a positive value on the Palermo scale?

  99. How does it compare? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Sumatra earthquake was 9.0, and it just killed
    over 24000 people. Supposing nothing is done (except
    for evacuations) and the asteroid hits, how would
    the damage compare?

  100. This is exactly what we need! by logicnazi · · Score: 1

    Unfortunatly people have a great deal of trouble understanding small probabilities, we tend to round them off to zero once they fall below a certain level. Just as bad most people tend to worry about things they can understand and see examples of (like mugging and murder) and ignore those dangers they don't understand or have never seen even if these dangers are more risky.

    Global warming and asteroid impacts are two great examples. While global warming doesn't have the low probability problem (some of its extreme consequences like a repeat of the younger dras cold period do) it is likewise an unfamiliar danger with the capacity to impact most humans. Yet our natural inclination is to be afraid of events we see like planes flying into the world trade center even if they are of less risk to ourselves.

    A close call with a large asteroid is exactly what we need to wake us up. It is probably too much to hope that we would start allocating our budget based on an objective risk/benefit analysis. Hopefully though it could at least raise our level of emotional concern about these global catastrophes.

    --

    If you liked this thought maybe you would find my blog nice too:

  101. Odds of hitting the moon? 0. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    It isnt going to hit the moon, as it is on the other side of the earth when the asteroid is suposed to hit.

  102. And Now That It Has Your Attention by VernonNemitz · · Score: 1

    With all eyes on this asteroid, how long will it be before they remember to keep looking for the still-unknown ones that might hit BEFORE April 13, 2029?

  103. Girls in the neighborhood by tekrat · · Score: 2, Funny

    Just think of the possibilities. You could build a asteroid-proof shelter in your backyard, and then, when it's clear that the human race has only hours left to live, you invite all the cute chicks from your neighborhood into your shelter, so that can ... ehem... repopulate the Earth.

    Finally, slashdot readers get laid.

    This would almost make it worth wiping out civilization as we know it.

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
  104. Enviro-whackos scream "Save the asteroid!!!" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Imagine the lawsuits enviro-whackos would file if the US government planned to nuke this asteroid.

    You know it's true, too.

  105. Bring It On by un1xl0ser · · Score: 1

    I've got my duct tape, some water and batteries.

    All I can say to that asteroid is this, BRING IT ON!

    --
    v4sw6PU$hw6ln6pr4F$ck 4/6$ma3+6u7LNS$w2m4l7U$i2e4+7en6a2X h
  106. The is already a website registered by faramir_fr · · Score: 1

    www.mn4.com is owned by a spanish company. So I believe that they will crash their property somewhere far from them. I bet either Australia/New Zealand.

    Woot I'm safe in southern France...

    1. Re:The is already a website registered by Fuzzums · · Score: 1

      http://www.2004mn4.com/ is owned by s ****** bomain broker.

      let's sue him for the future damage of 2004mn4...

      --
      Privacy is terrorism.
  107. that's ok by roman_mir · · Score: 1

    if Bush doesn't liberate us and if Ukraine doesn't torpedoe our airplanes, this baby will still get us at the end.

  108. Re:Make it work for us - aim it towards... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Too bad we can't aim it at all the Red States. After all, theyr'e the one who got us into this mess with all their evangelical apocalypse visions. Mind over matter folks. The evangelicals put all their wishes together and summoned up this rock in their misguided attempt to make it into heaven. The middle east has guys crashing planes into buildings to get to their virgins in heaven and the U.S. has whackjob evangelicals crashing asteroids into the whole fucking planet. Great. Fucking great job guys.

  109. lol by XxXoldsaltXxX · · Score: 0

    lets start rollin the dice !!

  110. Yeah yeah yeah by Second_Derivative · · Score: 1

    Nukes my foot, I'm sure when the day actually rolls round the asteroid will be destroyed by a teenage girl piloting a giant space mech with a really fkking big gun

    (okay so there's no supernova wave involved here but you get the idea. Cookie goes to whoever gets the reference)

  111. Reminds me of this great partial line... by eno2001 · · Score: 1

    ...from the movie "True Stories" by David Byrne. This one character played by Spalding Gray ended one of his sentences with "...what with the end of the world coming and all". I think I'm going to start using this liberally in all of my conversations... what with the end of the world coming and all. ;P

    --
    -"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
  112. Ha ha! I wonder how many will get it? by BigChigger · · Score: 1

    "Women's lib ended about 15 seconds after impact" (paraphrasing) We'll test that theory.

    BC

  113. But look on the bright side by discHead · · Score: 1

    An impact would probably throw enough material up into the atmosphere that we wouldn't have to worry about global warming for a good long while.

  114. This is actually a very small rock. by Thapa · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    I'm watching this thing as closely as I can, but I don't think we're as doomed as we look.

    Using an impact calculator that people have quoted in a number of earlier posts, 2004 MN4 (being only .4km wide) will only produce a crater about 4km wide (if it hits land). This is quite small, in fact.

    The Chicxulub crater, left by the rock that killed the dinosaurs, is at least 150km in diameter, theoretically left by a rock 10km in diameter.

    Essentially, unless you're under it or near the tidal wave, I don't think you have much to worry about from 2004 MN4. But now is a better time than ever to realize we need to work on our planetary defences.

  115. Re:Ha ha! I wonder how many will get it? by Duhavid · · Score: 1

    I got it.

    Didnt it also posit that Israel and the Arab world would have a fight to the death just after?

    --
    emt 377 emt 4
  116. I wrote to my congresswoman... by fragamus · · Score: 1

    ...three times this year about the issue of NEO impact. I received no response. Perhaps this will pique her interest. Her name is Anna Eshoo, and she needs to get on this issue. I think we need to build a Space Elevator RIGHT NOW so that we can haul heavy stuff up there to deal with this kind of problem.

  117. If the errors are too big... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    If the errors in the predicted orbit are too big, a "love tap" could make the problem worse.

    Better to pulverize it into little chunks that would burn up in the atmosphere.

  118. Why create shrapnel when you don't have to? by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 1

    Why risk turning one asteroid problem into thousands of smaller asteroid problems when all you need to do is to make it miss?

    A couple of years with a big solar sail attached could make a tiny change to the orbit. Ditto a solar-powered ion engine, or a reactor-powered one if you're in a hurry. If you're in a huge hurry, put an Orion-style pusher plate onto it and hit it with a long series of small bombs.

    1. Re:Why create shrapnel when you don't have to? by ArbitraryConstant · · Score: 1

      I don't see any reason to make a big show about conserving reaction mass. Reaction mass only matters when you have to bring it with you. With an asteroid, it would be possible to simply scoop bits of it into buckets, and then fling the buckets away as fast as possible given the accelerators we can come up with.

      --
      I rarely criticize things I don't care about.
    2. Re:Why create shrapnel when you don't have to? by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 1

      In a huge hurry, a single thermonuclear warhead ought to be able to totally vaporise a 300m diameter asteroid, without question. It's just a matter of delivering it.

      --
      You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
    3. Re:Why create shrapnel when you don't have to? by aminorex · · Score: 1

      Sure, and then after you threw half of it away, you'll discover that it's made of Platinum-Iridium.

      Holy crap. Who knew?

      --
      -I like my women like I like my tea: green-
    4. Re:Why create shrapnel when you don't have to? by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      > In a huge hurry, a single thermonuclear warhead
      > ought to be able to totally vaporise a 300m
      > diameter asteroid...

      Not a chance.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    5. Re:Why create shrapnel when you don't have to? by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 1

      Check the DOD stats on the estimated radius of total destruction for a 20MT burst -- it's on the order of kilometers.

      OK, this should be really easy to figure out. Just give me the thermal output of a 20MT nuke, and then calculate the amount of energy needed to vaporize a 300m ball of rock or nickel-iron.

      I don't know what the numbers are offhand, but I'm pretty sure that you can easily vaporize that much material with a 20MT burst. I'm not going to be convinced by some random /.er saying "not a chance". Back it up with some physics.

      --
      You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
  119. Because little ones burn up in the atmosphere by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Big one's don't.

    1. Re:Because little ones burn up in the atmosphere by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, that's still dumping the same amount of energy into the atmosphere. So instead of dying in a shockwave, everyone bakes.

      Sounds like a win to me.

  120. Three days ahead of the tax deadline. by Dr.+Mu · · Score: 3, Funny

    The IRS income tax deadline in 2029 will be Monday, April 16th. I think, perhaps, I'll file for an extension that year.

    1. Re:Three days ahead of the tax deadline. by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 1

      An extension to file is not an extension to pay. Federal income tax is pay as you go.

    2. Re:Three days ahead of the tax deadline. by EduardoTheBastard · · Score: 1
      Although you were trying to be funny, I'll try for informative:

      When filing for an extension, you have to pay your estimated tax due (and there are penalties if you under-estimate by very much.)

      So, of the two certain things in life (death and taxes), it looks like taxes still trumps death!

    3. Re:Three days ahead of the tax deadline. by shuad · · Score: 1

      Good idea. Sadly, death and taxes are the only things you cannot get out of. Taxes, though, wasn't always that way. It used to be that the Constitution protected against income taxes at the Federal level, since they were direct taxes then. But, with the 17th amendment, they made income taxes indirect (therefore, allowable for the federal goverment). Hence, we cannot get out of taxes, just like we cannot get out of death. -Shuad

  121. Impact effect of a grain of salt. by JeanPaulBob · · Score: 4, Funny
    Numbers should, of course, be taken with a grain of salt
    As you suggest, I ran the figures for a grain of salt through the impact effects calculator.

    Specifically, I used a 0.0003 meter grain of salt with a density of 2165 kg/m^3 (suggested by the I'm Feeling Lucky result for how big is a grain of salt) at 17km/s and 45 degree impact, and dropped it in 1000 meters of water.

    Results
    • Impact Energy: This projectile is so small that it burns up during atmospheric traverse
    • Crater Formed in Seafloor: Are you kidding?
    • Earthquake: It burns up in the freakin' atmosphere!
    • Radiant Flux at 100 km: You're an idiot.
    I really don't see what you're so worried about.
  122. New Reality TV Series. by Alkaiser · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Survivor: Asteroid Impact"

    You compete with 20 others to get a spot in the emergency bunkers.

    No holds barred.

    --
    Netjak.com independent reviews of domestic & import video ga
  123. Only 24 more years... by Dachannien · · Score: 1

    ...to doom us all by fscking up trying to prevent the asteroid hitting the Earth.

  124. Another Moon? by Blacklantern · · Score: 1

    Any chance of the Earth catching this thing and creating another moon? Like the moons around Mars?

    --


    "There is only a one in six billion chance that you actually exist"
    1. Re:Another Moon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If so, it wouldn't be too helpful: it's only a few hundred meters in diameter.

    2. Re:Another Moon? by pnewhook · · Score: 1

      We already have three moons (the big one you can see, 3753 Cruithne and 2002 AA29). How many more do you want?

      --
      Tesla was a genius. Edison however was a overrated hack who liked to torture puppies.
  125. Proposed contingency plan by Wordsmith · · Score: 1, Informative

    If the asteroid gets too close, all we have to do is hook it up to a cable or dsl line, and post an article about emulating a C64 under a homebrew nintendo close running a linux port onto the asteroid. then link it from slashdot.

    we'll be fine.

    1. Re:Proposed contingency plan by ZeroExistenZ · · Score: 1

      I can't believe the parent got modded "informative"...


      "The asteroid is going to impact, your god! What do we do?!"
      "Search for geeks, sir!"
      "Where do we find these... geeks you're thinking about?"
      "SLASHDOT!"

      *consulting ./-er*
      "What do we do!"
      "We have a secret weapon... Which makes distant servers melt, brings illegal networks down, heals appearant terminal people, and stops evil powers!"
      "What kind of weapon?"
      "It's a secret..."
      *Posts link to asteroid linked on ./*

      The world.. saved again..
      *some catchy superhero tune*
      --
      I think we can keep recursing like this until someone returns 1
  126. I will be 84 then... by cbdavis · · Score: 1

    shucks - would like to see this smack our silly asses. Of course, we could get out sh*t together and save the planet, but Im guessing we'll screw it up somehow. The human race needs a good biatch slap and an asteroid would be perfect. So to all you youngins, if this bears fruit, good luck!

  127. But what about Earth's gravity well? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Couldn't it near-miss the earth, and be tugged into Earth's asteroid-shadow just far enough to intersect with the moon?

  128. Re:Make it work for us - aim it towards... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Florida gets 3 hurricanes just before the election...
    Ohio gets a killer Blizzard soon after the election...
    Biggest earthquake in 40 years...
    Big frickin rock discovered headed towards earth...

    ...AKA ACTS OF GOD.

    ...and the evangelicals in Jesus Land (TM) still think god appointed W president.

    That, or W could be just another one of the disasters.

    I agree with Mike Malloy, it's time for a headpinching.

  129. Tinfoil hat: not as crazy as it sounds... by Tackhead · · Score: 1
    > We need to combine our efforts.
    > We need to build a monumentally massive tin hat for the world.

    How about a tinfoil hat for one side of the asteroid?

    Unfortunately, the Yarkovsky Effect - deflecting an asteroid by differentially heating parts of its surface - is likely to be too small to save us. Deflection of a rock comparable in size to 2004MN4, namely 6489 Golevka, was observed as 15km in 12 years of observation. Depending on the eventual impact point (if any) of 2004MN4, we may have to deflect it by thousands of kilometers.

    Yes, you'll probably get much more deflection by wrapping half the rock in mylar (and/or dusting the other half of it with soot), rather than relying on the natural effect observed on 6489 Golevka, but we don't know enough about 2004MN4 (albedo/mass) to guess yet.

  130. Hmmm..... by orion41us · · Score: 1

    Hmmm...

    1: Convince everyone impact is eminent. 2: Sell Asteriod insurance... 3: ... PROFIT!!!!

  131. NASA confirms... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The earth is dying!?

  132. How about Asteroid ownership by Zhu Guangya by aisnota · · Score: 2, Informative
    The asteroid was discovered by a Chinese observatory and its international code is No. 10388



    Zhu Guangya is a physicist and is a member of Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) and the Chinese Academy of Engineering. He has been instrumental in shaping China's development programs for the A-bomb and the H-bomb. Being a strategic scientist, Zhu has helped create the country's long-term development of defense technology.


    Noting his crucial role in country's technological development Lu Yongxiang, president of china handed over a certificate of asteroid possession to Zhu at ceremony and workshop last Sunday.

    --
    http://www.aisnota.com/slashdot/ Welcome to Logic and the Future
  133. If I pay $699... by hughk · · Score: 1

    ...will it go away?

    --
    See my journal, I write things there
    1. Re:If I pay $699... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, I'd be 3 easy payments of $250!!

    2. Re:If I pay $699... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did SCO go away when a few poorly-informed (or ethically-challeneged) businesses paid its extortion demand? No... that outcome takes time. And in the case of asteroid MN4, we may not be around to its demise.

  134. Re:Astronomers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd be worried too, they are suppose to be looking at the sky not the stock market!!

    Ouch!

  135. I already left with Heavens Gate. by agent · · Score: 1

    I already left with Heavens Gate.
    LOL
    Peace.

  136. Thirty SEVEN! *Slurp* *Slurp* by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... obligatory Clerks reference...

  137. What about a gnome applet.. by cyfex · · Score: 1

    showing non-miss propability in real-time?

    It would fit nice next to that old gweather applet..

    --
    cyfex

  138. Playing with an impact calculator by Elwood+P+Dowd · · Score: 1
    I'm playing with U of Arizona's Lunar and Planetary Library Earth Impact Effects Program.

    Using NASA's figures (link from the story): impact velocity 12.59 km/s, diameter 0.390 km, mass 7.9e+10 kg

    Guestimating volume if it's a sphere is (4 / 3) * pi * (((0.390/2) km)^3) = 31 059 355.8 m^3 (calc)

    Guestimating density if it's a sphere is (7.9e+10 kg) / ((4 / 3) * pi * (((0.390/2) km)^3)) ~= 2540 kg / m^3 (calc), which is necessary for the calculator, and looks like a reasonable figure.

    Totally guessing impact angle of 45 degrees.

    I'm sure they actually have a decent fix on what part of the Earth it would hit. And a pretty decent guess of the angle of impact, too.

    The low impact velocity means no fireball, apparently, and very little immediate effect once you get a few hundred miles away. It looks like this calculator doesn't mention the potential for tidal waves, though. Dunno what about that. And dunno if it's ignoring potential climate effects.

    --

    There are no trails. There are no trees out here.
  139. Free Tacos? by telemonster · · Score: 3, Funny

    Does everyone in the world get a free Taco if it hits a Taco Bell?

    --
    Southeastern Virginia REPRESENT!
    1. Re:Free Tacos? by Captain+Nitpick · · Score: 1
      Does everyone in the world get a free Taco if it hits a Taco Bell?

      Does that count direct impact, or do we win if there's any Taco Bell formerly located in the crater? And if there's more than one, do we get multiple tacos?

      --
      But then again, I could be wrong.
  140. when did 1 out of 37 become a low probability? by oogoody · · Score: 1

    Haven't you ever watched the poker channel?
    It happens all the time.

  141. of course no mainstream media yet. by Shakezoola · · Score: 1

    haven't you heard, reggie white died. clearly he is more important than an asteroid or a tsunami creating earthquake killing several thousand.

  142. Relevant Angry Flower Cartoon Strip by dhoonlee · · Score: 1

    http://www.angryflower.com/astero.gif

  143. It's a booster rocket shell by bhima · · Score: 2, Insightful

    really!! do some research

    --
    Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
  144. Effects Described in 'Lucifer's Hammer' (1977) by deanoaz · · Score: 1

    This book by Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle described the tracking of an asteroid which ultimately strikes the earth, causing, among other things, a mile-high tidal wave in Los Angeles. The devastating effects leave only isolated pockets of civilazation still functioning. Lucifer's Hammer is a large book, but well worth reading.

    --
    If 'the people' in Amendment 2 are 'the state' then Amendments 1, 2, 4, 9, and 10 benefit the state, not you.
    1. Re:Effects Described in 'Lucifer's Hammer' (1977) by Shoob · · Score: 1

      Not to move too far off-topic, but this is one of my favorites. Granted it was written in the 70's it's still pretty accurate as far as global destruction and the skills needed to survive.

  145. couple questions for discussion by BigGerman · · Score: 1
    Since the signal to noise ratio on this topic is very low, let's talk about couple concrete things here:

    First, obviosly we do not know if the thing is going to hit. For this reason we cannot predict where exactly it would hit either. But we can estimate that at least to a hemisphere.
    I believe some on Slashdot either know how to do such calculation (which half of the Earth is going to face the incoming asteroid) or know people who already did. So please cough this information up.

    Second, what would be criteria to decide whether we even want to stop the damned thing at all? I suspect it would be a while before we know where it is going to hit.
    If it is going into a low density area (not ocean), would not we just cordon it off and enjoy the show?
    What if it is NYC? Is it cheaper to abandon NYC or try to stop the asteroid?
    What are the other possibilities and our response to them?

    What about possible ways to change its trajectory / destroy it? Surface nuclear blast? The thing is not that big. When atomic energy was used to move earth / dig canals, the volume of work was comparable to this rock.

    1. Re:couple questions for discussion by Shakezoola · · Score: 1

      What if it was going to hit the middle east? Do we just sit here and say sucks to be them, let those poor bastards deal with it? What if the impact is the rain forest? Does that become a global concern? What if all it impacts the moon instead? forcing the moon into an alternate orbit? what if we did what if's for 24 more years?

    2. Re:couple questions for discussion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See comment on wikipedia.org. It should hit somewhere in time zones GMT +3 to GMT -10. But there is a very slight chance it would whip around the Earth and hit somewhere else.

  146. If it crashes the aliens better buckle up... by Marton · · Score: 3, Informative

    According to this calculator the crater would be about 9 kilometers in diameter, it would cause a 7.1 strong earthquake and a 44 m/s shockwave a hundred kilometers from the epicentre. (Assuming 90 degree collision angle and iron composition - basically, the worst.)

    Note that this assumes 4940 megatons in kinetic energy, and Nasa says it's "only" 1600.

  147. It's raining, it's pouring.... by dspisak · · Score: 1

    the old man is hurling four-football-field-long rocks at us!

  148. They're aiming at us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Look at the odds

  149. lol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No offense, but you sound like the typical overly-politically motivated yahoo whose head is in outer space. Put away the tin foil had.

    PS- that isn't aliens talking to you through your TV, that's just static.

  150. Oooh, oooh! by i41Overlord · · Score: 1

    Noting his crucial role in country's technological development Lu Yongxiang, president of china handed over a certificate of asteroid possession to Zhu at ceremony and workshop last Sunday.

    Before anyone else takes it, I claim the Moon! (I'm printing up a Certificate of Moon Possession as we speak)

  151. Oooops! by jac1962 · · Score: 1

    I e-mailed this story to my local television news station. They're going to headline it on the 6:00 p.m. news. Better stock up on toilet paper and canned goods before the hysterical masses wipe the shelves clean. . .

    --
    "I worked hard for it. I deserve it. And I have it," Campbell said. "It's all mine."
  152. put data into Celestia format by thomasa · · Score: 1

    Does anyone or can anyone put the
    known data into a Celestia importable
    file format so the ignorant among us
    can view this possible event?? (Speaking
    of myself.)

  153. The joke by daniil · · Score: 1

    is entirely on you.

    --
    Man is a slave because freedom is difficult, whereas slavery is easy.
  154. News at 11: Time passes by hixie · · Score: 1

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but can't these odds _only_ go up until they drop to 0? So that reporting the fact that the odds have gone up is just reporting on the fact that we have slightly more data, which is blatently obvious as we're recording it continuously?

    1. Re:News at 11: Time passes by BengalsUF · · Score: 1

      No, the odd cannot only go up with more data. The odds can go up or down, based upon what the data reveals.

    2. Re:News at 11: Time passes by hixie · · Score: 1

      How could the odds go down if they don't go down to zero?

  155. location, anyone? by Fuzzums · · Score: 1

    i guess since they know almost everything about the path and the chance of hitting the earth and when it's going to hit the earth...

    do they have a map of WHERE (with %) it's going to hit?

    --
    Privacy is terrorism.
  156. SNAKE EYES by Stoutlimb · · Score: 1

    The probability of rolling snake eyes on two (six sided) dice is 1 in 36, compared to 1 in 37 chance of earth being hit by that asteroid. How many times has any slashdot reader rolled snake eyes in their lifetime?

    I just thought it was a sobering way to think about it.

  157. Endtimes by wingnut2600 · · Score: 1

    This gives me just enough time to become a master oil-driller and put together a crack team of oddballs to drill to the center of the asteroid and nuke it.

    Hopefully I will not bear a beautiful child that the hunky oil-driller will fall in love with...

  158. Nasa's Orbit Simulator by Shoob · · Score: 1

    Playing around with the simulator for the 2004 MN4 and Earth orbits, looks like it will be about .105 AU from Earth on that date. However, on April 14, 2052 it's a scant .0027 AU...now that's close! The simulator actually shows the two hitting each other.

  159. From South Park by PingPongBoy · · Score: 1

    "It's coming right for us!"

    --
    Know your pads. One time pad: good for cryptography. Two timing pad: where to take your mistress.
  160. Mings at it again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    *dons tinfoil skullcap*

  161. One things for sure by aztektum · · Score: 0

    They didn't see that /.'ing comin'

    --
    :: aztek ::
    No sig for you!!
  162. There are no unaffected countries by coyote-san · · Score: 1
    There would be no unaffected countries. Besides the humanitarian and economic issues, the impact would throw a lot of dust into the atmosphere and we could see 'nuclear winter' type effects.

    Does anyone have comparable numbers for major volcanic eruptions? I'm specifically thinking about the eruptions near the year without a summer (1816).

    --
    For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. -- H L Mencken
  163. Torino Impact Hazard Scale by halogen958 · · Score: 1

    Has anyone else noticed that the graphic for the Torino Impact Hazard Scale has changed in the last few days? Among other things, Levels 2-4 have had the phrase "New telescopic observations very likely will lead to re-assignment to level 0" added to their descriptions.
    I believe the original graphic was similar to this: http://www.dca.state.fl.us/bpr/EMTOOLS/spacewx/tor ino_text_big.jpg

  164. What they don't say is: by TheEmpyrean · · Score: 1

    That in order to avoid panic, they haven't mentioned the 97.3% change it will hit on the 14th

  165. Re: Making money from the (possible) disaster by Besjon · · Score: 1


    Or how about T-Shirts and coffee mugs.

    (too much time on my hands)

  166. Besides the time_t relief by manifoldronin · · Score: 1

    When is the Social Security projected to go broke?

    --
    Tyranny isn't the worst enemy of a democracy. Cynicism is.
  167. THE TERRORISTS by IcarusMoth · · Score: 1

    could this be the work of... THE TERRORISTS!?1/

  168. If it hits earth please hit Redmond Washington! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bye bye Micro$oft!

    Muwhahahahaha!! ;)

  169. THE TERRORISTS by IcarusMoth · · Score: 1

    could this be the work of... THE TERRORISTS!?1/
    raise the terror alert system to black; for impending Apocalypse!
    Now who wants Mojitos! Open Invitation to New Orleans for IcarusMoth's First Annual Armaggedon Party! There will be chips and dip.
    --
    Zim: I put the fires out.
    Tallest: Zim, you made them worse.
    Zim: Worse or BETTER?

  170. Well, I like Ben Stiller... by RedlumF · · Score: 1

    And it seems we might meet the Focker indeed! ;-)

  171. Sounds like a lame plot for a time-travel movie. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or at least Tim Burton's revisionist version. ;)

  172. Getting laid is easy.... by leereyno · · Score: 1

    The hard part is finding a woman with:

    1: The mind of a sage.
    2: The patience of a saint
    3: The face of an angel
    4: The body of a baywatch hottie
    5: The libido of a nymphomaniac.

    In other words, marriage material.

    --
    Muslim community leaders warn of backlash from tomorrow morning's terrorist attack.
    1. Re:Getting laid is easy.... by SomeGuyFromCA · · Score: 1
      Yeah. You really don't want:

      1. The mind of a baywatch hottie.
      2. The patience of a nymphomaniac
      3. The face of an saint
      4. The body of a sage
      5. The libido of an angel.


      I mean, that just would not work.
      --
      if the answer isn't violence, neither is your silence / freedom of expression doesn't make it alright
    2. Re:Getting laid is easy.... by Xugumad · · Score: 1

      That's easy. I know several lesbians matching just that description. Now, straight women, you're out of luck, sorry...

  173. realistically... by zogger · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...should the odds look grim and there's only x-small amount of seats off planet, I would wager it's the guys with the biggest guns and the willingness to use them who would get off planet, and I doubt they would let any civilian politicians or generic stupid random rich farts go for a ride either, they would tell them to fudge off. To get loyalty from their other troops, they would hold a lottery for the last few seats, to insure no counter revolts, with winners only announced at the last second. Maybe.

    Even then it might not occur, jealous other military forces might attack with such force that no one gets off the planet at all. And by 2029 I *doubt* we will have much of a space launch ability anyway, I think a thousand all at once would be pushing it. I've weatched the space race since going outside and staring up trying to see sputnik, and frankly, it ain't all that far along compared to what I thought would happen way back then. and even with rutans and virgin airlines help, it still won't be that much further along in the 20's unless there's some sort of dramatic breakthrough to replace chemical reaction rocket engines. They are just too expensive for huge mass production, require a lot of people to get a few people off the ground and lots of work. And you'd still have the problem of how would you get the ground crew to cooperate? Like stated, what good is money. Now, maybe large balloons, or blimps might be sufficient, not sure, but it would be worth a try and a heck of a lot cheaper to mass produce..I bet mass prouction you can make decent Model T blimps for the price of a car. Add in some groceries and grog, good to go for a week of floating above the destruction. Earth quakes and Tsuanmis you could fly over and float around for awhile until things settled down. Even if the winds blow ya around, so what, let em. strap in.

    That might be more doable on a somewhat larger scale than just 1,000 people. You would think after a few days it would be enough settled to reland someplace.

    Me,with a big ole asteroid coming in, and say no blimp or rocket, naked barbecue! Dead mans dinner, surf and turf! Well,proly wear a grease spatter apron, got to be practical about these things. Then kick back in the lawn chairs and watch the show! Hmm, maybe loot a bank and play monopoly with real money and deeds to properties waiting for it to show up. sort of like new years eve countdown.

    Ya, ya, I know, you young guys all thinking the same thing, "hang out with the ole lady ya tarded fool, get you a bunch..."..Sure,sure, sure, sure, but get that out of the way the week before the show. I mean, you can get lucky anytime, how often do you get to see a PLANET SMASHER hit? We are geeks, some things are just *important*.

    Anyway, that one is too small, need a much larger one for a good fireworks show. The Mayans claim no history past 2012 anyway, something like that I was reading.

    1. Re:realistically... by LMariachi · · Score: 1
      I would wager it's the guys with the biggest guns and the willingness to use them who would get off planet [...] how would you get the ground crew to cooperate?

      I'm sure I wouldn't be the only one willing to volunteer to get those assholes off the planet. Of course, it'd have to be a one-way trip...

    2. Re:realistically... by zogger · · Score: 1

      +++6 good idea. spread rumors on the internets about it, all the worlds top generals build space ships and fly away. I like it!

    3. Re:realistically... by Saeger · · Score: 1
      Ya, ya, I know, you young guys all thinking the same thing, "hang out with the ole lady ya tarded fool

      No, no, they're thinking: "hang with the old lady? If the world's ending then I've got to get started looting, raping, and building up my post-apocalyptic empire." :)

      Personally, what would be going through my mind is, "Damn. An asteroid? The odds were so much higher that we would have killed ourselves off by this point with our own technology. Oh well. Death will come quickly for me and hopefully civilization will jumpstart from the ashes when the bastards emerge from their underground bunkers..."

      --

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    4. Re:realistically... by zogger · · Score: 1

      store gas and invest in a welder. Worked for mel gibson, ha!

  174. No sabotage, please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now that we finally have some non-zero odds to witness an asteroid impact on earth, everybody here is pushing to nuke it, spoiling a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.

  175. Hello? 8.9-9.0 Earthquake? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While everyone is pissing over an asteroid, 23,000+ people died in an earthquake that moved the entire island of Sumatra 100 feet and "disturbed the Earth's rotation." But that doesn't get posted on /. WTF? HELLO? HELLO???

  176. Hello, 23,000 killed in tidal waves? by raehl · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Mainstream media can only handle one natural disaster at a time, and the one that happened NOW is more important than the one which has a 2.7% chance of happening in 25 years.

    Also, we should expect the probability of impact to continue to increase until it either goes to zero (most likely) or 1. This asteroid has a sigma of 0 - that means the MOST LIKELY path is impact. More observations are most likely going to eliminate the outlying paths first, so as we eliminate more and more of the outlying paths of possibility the most likely path will be more and more likely.

    Until we get the observation that says "Ah, yeah, definitely going to miss", and then it'll be zero again.

    1. Re:Hello, 23,000 killed in tidal waves? by AxelBoldt · · Score: 1
      Also, we should expect the probability of impact to continue to increase until it either goes to zero (most likely) or 1.

      Yes, and if you want to be more precise, replace "most likely" with "with a probability of 97.3%". After all, the asteroid will hit us if and only if our predicted impact probability doesn't go down to 0 but goes up to 1 instead.

    2. Re:Hello, 23,000 killed in tidal waves? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Mainstream media can only handle one natural disaster at a time, and the one that happened NOW is more important than the one which has a 2.7% chance of happening in 25 years.

      Would you people give it a break already? Nobody here cares about Asia or 23,000 people getting killed by some tidal wave. This is "News for Nerds" not CNN. If an iPod battery explodes and kills 23 people THEN it can be a front page story. If an asteroid might hit the earth in 25 years, then it might be a story. If a bunch of people get killed in a big earth quake, it's NOT news for nerds unless you live in Asia!

    3. Re:Hello, 23,000 killed in tidal waves? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You're a troll, but I'll answer you anyway,

      Would you people give it a break already?

      Hmm, No. Wait, let me think, hmm, still No.

      Nobody here cares about Asia or 23,000 people getting killed by some tidal wave.

      I care about Asia and the lives of 23,000+ people killed.

      BTW It's a tsunami, not a tidal wave (you're welcome). The physics of tsunami formation is quite interesting and I'd love to hear more about how early warning systems works (particularly how they avoid false positives), but that isn't "News for Nerds" right?

      it's NOT news for nerds unless you live in Asia!

      Yes, I'm a nerd and nope, I don't live in Asia, but I realise that there's a world outside my doorsteps.

  177. about time by demmer · · Score: 0

    humanity always needed some kind of threat to work together...

    things like the tsunami in the indian ocean and this asteroid makes people feel united and forget about childish fights about all kinds of unimportant things...

    hope for the best

  178. the asteroid itself... by zogger · · Score: 1

    ..would probably release enough energy to cause earthquakes, so we'd get an additional bonus shaking. A gigaton concentrated on one spot would penetrate deep you would think, energy wise. I guess it depends where it hits, some areas more likely than others to take it as an earthquake domino effect.

  179. You're not a very good.... by raehl · · Score: 1

    Roulette has 18 black, 18 red, and 1 green for those not in the know.

    You're not a very good roulette player, are you?

    1. Re:You're not a very good.... by Viking+Coder · · Score: 1

      You're not a very knowledgeable roulette player, are you?

      1) Read the other responses to my post to see that we were talking about European roulette. The grandparent poster started it, and I responded in kind.

      2) European odds are better than American odds - who's the better player?

      --
      Education is the silver bullet.
    2. Re:You're not a very good.... by raehl · · Score: 1

      Since the American game is apparently more challenging, Americans are.

    3. Re:You're not a very good.... by Viking+Coder · · Score: 1

      You're assuming that the Americans take home as much money as the Europeans.

      How much do you want to bet that's not true?

      --
      Education is the silver bullet.
    4. Re:You're not a very good.... by smithmc · · Score: 1

      Since the American game is apparently more challenging, Americans are.

      Unless you're cheating, roulette is a game of chance, even more strictly so than, say, blackjack. There is nothing "challenging" about it. You either win or (far more likely) you lose.

      --
      Downmodding is the refuge of the weak. Don't downmod, make a better argument!
  180. Well... by tektek · · Score: 0

    if it hits the moon maybe we won't have to worry about showing proof for landing on the moon.

  181. It's called Scientific Notation by raehl · · Score: 1

    2.7e-2 = 0.027
    9.4e-7 = 0.00000094 or pretty much 0.

  182. Damn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Damn .. that's a week after I pay of the mortgage

  183. This just in: asteroid to miss Earth. by shawkin · · Score: 3, Informative

    Latest NASA update shows limited chance of impact.
    1 in 56,000.

    1. Re:This just in: asteroid to miss Earth. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Yeah, but the date (April 13, 2029, IIRC) is totally gone. So it was almost going to hit, but now it's so far away on that date that it doesn't even warrant mention? Either somebody goofed (either the earlier or later calculations), or ... what?

    2. Re:This just in: asteroid to miss Earth. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      JPL Sentry system reported 176 observations earlier, now only 118. Why were these removed? Did somebody feed false observation data that was now removed?

    3. Re:This just in: asteroid to miss Earth. by antikarma · · Score: 1

      From what I understand, JPL only has about 2/3 of the data in. The probability will be updated within the next few days when they get a sufficient amount of data.

    4. Re:This just in: asteroid to miss Earth. by RickHunter · · Score: 1

      Four possibilities: 1) The chance of impact rose so high that they're not willing to publically admit it for fear of the ensuing panic. 2) Further observations completely eliminated any chance of impact. (In order for this to happen, it would, I believe, have to be an observation of the "Doh, we forgot to convert from feet to meters in step 3" variety) 3) Further observations increased the uncertainty to the point where any estimate became meaningless. 4) They got tired of all the apocalypse-watchers refreshing the page every 30 seconds and removed the results, and are now engaging in a psychology experiment to see how long it takes them to notice.

    5. Re:This just in: asteroid to miss Earth. by cnettel · · Score: 1

      Regarding number 2, that's not really true. They have identified the object in pictures from March 2004. The thing is that by just confirming the old nominal orbit, which all along was on target to miss Earth by at least ten Earth radii, the probability of impact can go down significantly.

      If you wonder, the distance between the nominal path and impact on Earth is Stretch LOV times Sigma LOV. The current predicted impats are far more off than before and it's only by the fact that the true path is hard to predict that they, too, are not eliminated.
      All this said, what I really want to know is why a lot of observations have disappeared from the projections. It would be nice with some information on this, and maybe NEODyS confirming the new numbers. (They haven't performed any rerun as of yet.)

  184. It is going to miss by Foddrick · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Looks like the odds have changed again. Down to 1 in 56,000 - It's even a zero on the torino scale now. Check it out here.

  185. DOWN TO 1 in 56,000 by Xshare · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/risk/2004mn4.html I don't know what happened, but it's suddenly a 0 on the torino scale, etc. And impact date has changed to being 2039+... could that mean a return trip from the sun or something? Whatever happens, seems this story is over.

    1. Re:DOWN TO 1 in 56,000 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm...not so sure on the re-eval. If you run the orbital elements/visual simulator, 2029 still seems like the closest chance. I guess their online calculator doesn't have the latest inputs. It is indeed odd:

      1) that there are no close calls anywhere near 2029; the next closest one is 2037 or so.

      2) that for some reason, more widespread scrutiny has led to better resolution or evaluation of the orbital elements and it has *dramatically* altered the probability. This is troubling to me; shouldn't they have enough confident data on hand before 'going public' with a Torino level 4? How can they say, "Well, things don't look so good.", then later say "Nevermind."? What's the point of even have NEO predicting incidents so far in the future if they can be so unreliable?

    2. Re:DOWN TO 1 in 56,000 by Krisbee · · Score: 1

      However, these new results are based on a much lower number of observations (118). When it was on Torino 4, it was based on at lease 179 obeservations IIRC.
      How does this work ?

    3. Re:DOWN TO 1 in 56,000 by cnettel · · Score: 1

      Posted in another thread: http://www.hohmanntransfer.com/news.htm.

      You can also notice yourself in the page that the first listed observation is already in March this year. Obviously, the object was tracked back to an older photo. I can't explain the lowered number of observations, though. Eliminating that many as obvious measuring errors would be a bit surprising, if no special explanation is provided.

    4. Re:DOWN TO 1 in 56,000 by cnettel · · Score: 1

      2: They have said all along that the most likely outcome was to eliminate this chance. Torino 4 only means that the current data is putting it down to a quite limited range giving a high probability. Now, the orbit hasn't changed very much, BUT, it's changed enough to almost rule out the possibility of the orbit actually reaching Earth. As the nominal orbit was never that close, this is not surprising. They've been quite clear on the fact that the most likely solution was not centered on Earth. The closest nominal approach does not equate the most likely impact, as the positions for different years are possible to determine with different accuracy.
      The only good way to eliminate a lot of data was a longer data arc, and that was provided by backtracking the object to March. The whole point here is that we are good at estimating position in the sky, but that our abilities to determine the distance is far worse. Several observations a large amount of time apart makes it possible to triangulate the real position. As the object also moves during that time, it's not as simple as normal triangulation, but similar principles apply.

      I, for one, welcome our "publish everything" astronomical overlords.
      (That said, I would still be happy to know why the number of observations is down to 160.)

    5. Re:DOWN TO 1 in 56,000 by magnuss · · Score: 1

      There's more info about this on www.hohmanntransfer.com/news.htm:

      "JPL has updated its 2004 MN4 risk assessment, dropping its Torino Scale rating to zero ("no likely consequences"), and completely eliminating all impact solutions before the year 2037. Overall impact probability is put at one in 55,556. This assessment is based on all reported observations except those in the latest MPEC, 2004-Y71. "

      That should explain the "missing" observations.

    6. Re:DOWN TO 1 in 56,000 by cnettel · · Score: 1

      Nope. There are only about 20 new ones in Y71. More importantly, Y71 had not been released yet when they posted that number of 169 observations used to calculate the impact risk. I fully understand that they can't possibly use the very latest data, but eliminating data from a previous prediction is a completely different matter.

      (Y70 seems to have 243 observations in total...)

  186. Who's going to pay for the next recount? by zot+o'connor · · Score: 1

    I expect that the Washington state democrats are going to demand NASA do a recount w....

    Then, when we discover the overlooked orbital anomalies, and get the odds down to 7 to 1 in favor of a hit the republicans will sue....

    What machines are being used to calculate these?

    --

    --
    Zot O'Connor
  187. When it's 1 in 6... by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1

    call me so i can bring my dice and check if it's worth worrying.

    Thank you.

  188. Let's wait until the dust settles. by nilbog · · Score: 0
    The webpage just changed and now says the chances of impact are 1 in 56,000. The number of potential impacts also changed from 41 or so to 8.

    I think perhaps we should wait a little longer until we start deciding if this will be an issue or not. I mean, we do have a few years after all...

    --
    or else!
  189. Possibly immense economic damage, not deaths by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The 25-year advance warning is more than sufficient to relocate anyone in the blast area, so your statement about millions/billions of deaths is just silly. There would be practically zero deaths. Natural disasters are usually problematic because they take us by surprise. On the other hand, it could completely destroy cities or coastlines (via a resultant tsunami), so the economic damage might be immense.

  190. 2029 has been deleted. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Nasa risk page doesn't show 2029 right now. Phew. Clearly, all we need to do is make sure they leave the HTML the way it is, and we're safe...

  191. The odds are now 1 in 56,000 by TimFreeman · · Score: 1

    They recently revised the page at http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/risk/2004mn4.html to say the probability of impact is 1.8e-05, which is 1 in 55,555.

    1. Re:The odds are now 1 in 56,000 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the last update they showed results based on more than 169 observations.

      Now it's only 118. I just can't understand.

  192. Too bad, but it's not by mlyle · · Score: 1

    JPL's 2004MN4 page has been updated, and now there's no prediction for a near pass at all in 2029, and the cumulative impact odds are now 1 in 56,000.

    Looks like they found a much older observation of the asteroid that allowed the orbit to be determined very precisely.

    1. Re:Too bad, but it's not by rjch · · Score: 1
      JPL's 2004MN4 page has been updated, and now there's no prediction for a near pass at all in 2029, and the cumulative impact odds are now 1 in 56,000.
      Don't tell me they got that whole feet vs metres confused again...
  193. Wouldn't you know it... by miraclemax · · Score: 1

    That's Friday the 13th!

  194. 1300 Feet? That's it!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You guys are pussies. It's 1300 feet long.

    Here's your reference point:

    In 1995 the Landmark Hotel was demolished. It was 365 feet tall (about 1/4 size). It took 100 POUNDS of TNT. That's not a misprint. POUNDS.

    Call me after they have hit this rock with at least as many pounds of dynamite as my FUCKING CAR.
    http://www.pcap.com/landmark.htm

    I repeat myself. You guys are pussies.

  195. Impact risk now neglible by solferino · · Score: 1

    Sorry to break up the wise-cracking fun but the latest update at the impact risk page now has the asteroid at 0 on the Torino scale and the impact odds at 1 in 56,000.

  196. Now Torino 0 by xihr · · Score: 2, Informative

    And, in fact, hitting the page now (15:30 Pacific time), it's clear that the risk is gone; the object is now a Torino 0 (for all projected future encounters).

    1. Re:Now Torino 0 by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 1

      I so wish I had mod points......but this is the way I thought it was going. Even if it does come close to hitting, it is a small object and it should be easy to either deflect or mitigate the damage considering there's 20 sime years to work with it.

      --

      Gorkman

  197. Update: Not Going to Hit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Observations were found from the Spacewatch telescope in March 2004, and the new observations remove the chance of impact prior to 2038.

  198. 2 + 0 + 2 + 9 = 13 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The end is near.

  199. Possibly with reason. by abb3w · · Score: 1
    Given we have over two decades to work on the problem, it's just as well they don't start the yokels panicking yet. Not to mention that as of 6:30 PM EST, the story-given NASA URL has dropped the odds to about 2 in a billion.

    Anyway, it's only around 1.5 Gigaton potential yield....

    --
    //Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
    1. Re:Possibly with reason. by tdhillman · · Score: 1

      With GOOD reason.

      Given the incredible number of factors that can effect the travel of an object through space, worrying about something that might happen in 25 years if everything goes about as wrong as it can possibly go is an exercise in futility.

      It's just that those NASA guys are truly paid to address the incredibly small worries of life. Hell, never mnd that a piece of insulation can poke a hole in the wing of a space shuttle and take out a few astronauts. Let's all worry about the things that really matter.

      "Gee whiz Sparky- hold your thought on that reentry computer, I just spotted something a zillion miles away that seems to be headed for us."

      --
      befuddled (noun) 1. Unable to create a pithy sig
  200. Article Submission Template by adam31 · · Score: 1
    As we see these articles periodically over the next 24 years, it'd be nice to cut down on some redundant topics with a standard article submission header:

    "The latest update from NASA now gives 2004 MN4 a [increased/decreased probability of impact]. Somebody tell Bruce Willis!!! NASA advises, however, that this probability is likely to decrease in the near future. There is also a 50% chance that it will increase. You can calculate the impact outcome based on some parameters. Guys, this only gives us til April 13, 2029 to have sex... Friday the 13th!

  201. The End of the World by Avenger337 · · Score: 1

    Don't worry. The asteroid won't get us. This proves it. http://www.ebaumsworld.com/endofworld.html

  202. Impact no longer likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    The probability is now way down: 2e-5

    http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/risk/2004mn4.html

    I'm told this is due to identifying the asteroid on pre-discovery archival images.

    1. Re:Impact no longer likely by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Impact was never likely.

  203. Down to Torino 0 (1 in 55,000) by AJC1973 · · Score: 1

    The NASA impact probability page has been updated - it's a miss! (Almost certainly - less chance than random debris) It's down to Torino 0, Palermo -2.23, cumulative impact probability 0.0018%.

  204. Interesting by davepk · · Score: 1

    This morning we were looking at a 2.7% chance based on 176 observations and this afternoon we are looking at essentially zero chance based on 118 observations. Sounds like they decided to throw some of their data out resulting in a near zero probability.

  205. Already Dead by Cheirdal · · Score: 2

    Most Slashdot readers we'll be long dead by 2029. Most probable causes of death: 1) Cheese fries, 2) Toppings on Leftover pizza gone bad, 3)Heart explodes from extremely high levels of caffeine combined with causes 1 and 2.

  206. Probability is now way lower.... by testednegative · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Is this A) Government trying to keep it secret so they can cause less panic ? B) Simple mistake C) NASA cover up so they can relocate everything and save millions and be the only survivors. Not A as the government CAUSES panic, not dampens it... Not B as a mistake from 1 in 37 probabilty to now 1 in 56,000 is not exactly in the margin of errors that people would expect a government agency to be within. :o /me covers private parts with aluminum foil

  207. Torino scale updated - 0 by S3D · · Score: 2, Informative

    It seems the updated measerments striked it out from the list. Torino 0, cumulative probability 1.8e-5

  208. Officially Downgraded to zero by Rummey · · Score: 1

    The nasa website says it is a 1 in 526,316,000 chance of a collision event. The asteroid has been downgraded to a ZERO on the scale.

    Eat that apocolypse lovers.

  209. JPL has updated its 2004 MN4 risk assessment. by magnuss · · Score: 2, Informative

    FYI.

    "JPL has updated its 2004 MN4 risk assessment, dropping its Torino Scale rating to zero, and eliminating completely all impact solutions before the year 2037. Overall impact probability is put at one in 55,556. "

    Source:

    http://www.hohmanntransfer.com/news.htm
    http:// neo.jpl.nasa.gov/risk/2004mn4.html

    1. Re:JPL has updated its 2004 MN4 risk assessment. by bfwebster · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I post that this morning, fly to Chicago, check again, and...the odds are now zip. Ah, my brief shot at /. fame ruined by the cold equations. :-) ..bruce..

      --
      Bruce F. Webster (brucefwebster.com)
    2. Re:JPL has updated its 2004 MN4 risk assessment. by cnettel · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Interestingly enough, the first observation has been lowered to March, instead of June, and the total number of observations is down to 118 from around 170.

      This seems to mean they identified this object in old shots from March and from that data could eliminate quite a lot. This is confirmed in your source. BUT, it also seems to mean that they in the process threw out 50 observations as faulty?! Some kind of later explanation of this lowered total number would surely be interesting. Was the wrong celestial body observed by some people? Or is the identification of the object in March more certain than a lot of more recent observations? Any insights?

  210. Updated, odds now at 1.8e-05 by mackman · · Score: 2, Informative

    Move along, nothing to see here.

    http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/risk/2004mn4.html

  211. Downmod parent "idiotic" by abb3w · · Score: 1
    ...as that's the 2037 collision risk, not the 2029 risk. Geez, and with my .sig....

    --
    //Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
  212. The end of all things. by rice_burners_suck · · Score: 1
    I sincerely hope that this thing will hit the earth and bring about a cataclysm of biblical proportions that makes Noah's flood look like a Phoenix, Arizona in mid-day during the summer, and bringing about the end of all things.

    Hopefully, the Earth will be knocked out of its comfortable orbit, with its axis swinging at a different angle, and its distance being somewhat different from the sun, so that all the oceans will dry up, the atmosphere will blow away, all plant life will turn to dust, and all animal life will wither and die in massive clouds of smoke that will cover the Earth after the impact. Afterwards, Earth will be about as full of life as the surface of Mercury.

    All historical achievements, all things accomplished by man, all things discovered, learned, studied, and developed over thousands of years, all political changes that were brought about by the suffering and death of hundreds of thousands, even millions of people, all things great and small, all religions, and even love, will mean absolutely nothing after this happens... because nobody and nothing will be here to even know that they once existed.

    Why would I hope for such a terrible thing to happen? Because life is a pile of shit, and I can't wait to be put out of my misery.

  213. So how close will it come? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Impact probability is now virtually zero. So how close/far do they expect it to get?

  214. Something wrong with current data... by mtaff · · Score: 1

    OK. This thing wasn't even discovered until June 2004, and now all of a sudden we have data from March of 2004? Yesterday the number of observations was like 169, now there are only 118? I smell a rat. Or a bug. Or a hack. I want an explanation for the extra/missing data. Mark

    1. Re:Something wrong with current data... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Excellent observation.

      Someone else pointed out the 2029 impact date isn't showing up in the data table. Even if the impact probabilty has gone way down, we should still see data for the 4/13/2029 date.

    2. Re:Something wrong with current data... by mtaff · · Score: 1

      Also, NEODyS is still showing 1 in 38 odds of impact. Mark

    3. Re:Something wrong with current data... by cnettel · · Score: 1

      (Credit to magnuss for one of the links.) http://www.hohmanntransfer.com/news.htm mentions that the object was found in images from March 15th. I find this odd in no way in itself, it's quite natural that the determined orbit has been back-stepped to verify where the object was before its discovery in June, as any such data would improve the accuracy far more than more observations made today. Obviously, it seems they succeeded.

      The raw data linked from that site has 243 observations in total. Maybe the newest JPL data is filtering to only use observations from certain telescopes, or they're aggressively filtering out "junk" data. I would welcome some kind of explanation like "ooops, a lot of people looked at another rock" or something along those lines. Another note is that the size estimation is up again to 430 meters instead of 390. Not a big change in the light (pun intended) of the fact that this is based on the measured intensity in the data, nothing else.

    4. Re:Something wrong with current data... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm still scratching my head about the missing date - my current best guess is that major media attention was beginning to focus on this event. Rather than risk embarrassment and possibly engender panic, higher-ups decided to pull the numbers and give them a thorough work-over. Another post suggested that earlier observervations may not have been properly accounted for also. All-in-all, I'm thinking that when the odds get that close, then the issue deserves all due caution. I mean, heck, we sing hosannas when Linus holds the kernel back to make sure a driver issue get worked out. Here we're talking about a possible catastrophe. Time to calibrate the slide rules against the graphing calculators, I think.

  215. Re: Asteroids by tasidar · · Score: 1
    "The latest update from NASA now gives 2004 MN4 a 1-in-37 chance (probability of 2.7%) of hitting Earth on April 13, 2029."

    Frankly, I'm surprised at this... isn't the 2000 SG 344 also due to hit Earth in 2030?

    And then there's 1950DA which is a civilization killer

  216. Cal acting odd on my machine by pjern · · Score: 1

    user @ amd64 (/user) cal 4 2029
    April 2029
    Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7
    8 9 10 11 12 13 division by zero

  217. So much for fixing the unix rollover in 2038 by mamba-mamba · · Score: 1

    I guess those unix guys knew what they were doing when they settled on a time representation that rolls over in 2038.

    MM

    --
    By including this sig, the copyright holders of this work or collection unreservedly place it in the public domain.
  218. Nothing will happen. by DroopyStonx · · Score: 1

    I know everyone likes to be a jokester about this, but the reality is it isn't THAT big and can be easily moved or deflected.

    1400 feet isn't that big.

    Scientists are smart. In times of need, they will find a solution, and quickly at that.

    Don't worry about it.

    --
    We have secretly replaced these Slashdot mods' sense of humor with a rusty nail. Let's see if they notice!!
  219. Chance of Impact: 0.001800000% by paragon_au · · Score: 1

    It's good they didn't pick up on it and go overboard as they have done before.
    As of today the risk factor of the TORINO IMPACT HAZARD has dropped to 0. And on the Palermo Technical Impact Hazard Scale scale is now a -2.23.

    The chance of impact is now 0.001800000%

  220. Half an hour ago by paragon_au · · Score: 1

    It's been updated to a 0 on the Torino Scale and according to the 2004 NM risk stats it has a 0.001800000% of hitting earth.

  221. Probability by bheading · · Score: 1

    "Probability of 2.7%"

    There you go, I always thought probability was between zero and one (inform yourself) ...

  222. Social Security? problem solved by williepete25 · · Score: 1

    I knew Bush would think of an inventive solution.

  223. Update - Impact Risk Severely Lowered by timealterer · · Score: 1

    According to the impact risk site, the probability has been adjusted way down to 1.8e-05 with a Torino scale value of zero. A shame - I was hoping for some real drama and intrigue.

    --
    - Allen Pike
    Altering time, one time at a time.
  224. Very very very lucky... by Toby+The+Economist · · Score: 1

    ...to have an asteroid with a high enough probability of impact, but which is far enough in the future, that it might well encourage the development of SpaceGuard, without actually posing a truely devestating, immediate and unstoppable threat.

    --
    Toby

  225. More about missing observations by cnettel · · Score: 1

    I tracked back the observations to the version I had in cache in my laptop. Back when the last used observation by JPL was Dec 26.14032 and the probability was 0.022, JPL reported 169 observations used. http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/mpec/K04/K04Y64.html, MPEC 2004-Y64, also lists around 160 observations in total, ending on that date. Obviously, just about every observation was used until this calculation.

    Anyway, if the identification on March 15 is reasonably correct, even a hundred missing observations from the last few days shouldn't do much of a difference, if randomly chosen (not chosen just to fit the identification in March). Most of the accuracy is from the position at a certain date, not from the added precision of more measurements at just about the same time.

  226. Falling probability. by Atragon · · Score: 1
    I finally got back in to NASA, and MN4 is now a Torino 0 object, with the 2029 event gone entirely.

    True, but if you remember the previous number of observations was 169 (source, Google Cache) and the new number is 118. What happened to those other 51 observations and why did the baseline increase from 189.9 days to 287 days?

    1. Re:Falling probability. by n6mod · · Score: 1

      The second answer is easier, they included some data from March that wasn't there as of your cache link.

      Why some data was rejected? That I can't answer.

      --
      You have violated Robot's Rules of Order and will be asked to leave the future immediately.
  227. Retirement Party by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'll be turning 60 on April 13, 2029. This is not the way I was expecting to start my retirement.

  228. Any companies pursuing an OUTPOST scenario? by gfecyk · · Score: 1

    Outpost was an interesting space colonization game by Sierra (pre-EA) for Windows 3.1. It covered the possibility of an asteroid striking Earth around 2050 and an extra-Solar colonization scenario designed around it.

    I want to know if there's a company pursuing that possibility and putting together a crash colonization program. I might not get on the ship but I'll be glad to help a hundred (or two hundred) other souls on their way.

    --
    Use Evolution instead of Outlook? Bewa
  229. Re: Making money from the (possible) disaster by Ctrl-Z · · Score: 1

    Okay, the post isn't funny, but the T-shirt is hilarious!

    --
    www.timcoleman.com is a total waste of your time. Never go there.
  230. We need one of these by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion_project

    If we need to get off the planet. Lets build a bunch of the Super Orions and move. The enviroment is going to be screwed by the asteroid anyway what's a little extra radiation.

  231. And I just got... by camusflage · · Score: 1

    Volcano insurance. Now I'll need to steal from Lois again. This is not Freakin' Sweet!

    --
    The truth about Scientology, Xenu, and you: Operation Clambake
  232. A funny thing that Decimal Time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does anyone else find it odd that each post mentions the year 2029 when in fact the year in question is actually 2044? From the NASA table YYYY-MM-DD.DD = 2044-04-13.29 where the .29 is a decimal fraction of the thirteenth day of April, 2044. The first pass-by included in the chart won't happen until 2030-04-13.88! Link to the chart.

  233. Just wait by DeVilla · · Score: 1

    We have the climate changing in drastic ways, we have a killer asteroid coming our way, and some odd billion years from now, either the Bees or the Cock Roaches will be arguing over whether they sencelessly 'hunted' us out of existence.

  234. Useful URLs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a dedicated web page about this asteroid : http://2004mn4.info/ On the forum on this web site i found a URL showing the daily evolution of the impact probability: http://cacaribou.myftp.org/impact.htm